2W5?; Appellant Claimant HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON’BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, CJ. & HON’BLE SHRI R.L. JHANWAR, J. Misc. Appeal No. 1296 of 2005 Uday Ram Sahu, S/o Pokhraj @ Khaniya Ram Sahu, aged about 50 Years, R/o Village Chivridih, P.O. Pateva, Thana‘ Nayapara Rajim, District — Raipur (C.G.) VERSUS Dhumer Soni, S/o Thunku Soni, R/o Near Tikrapara Mantvari Kabirstan, Thana Tikrapara, Tehsil & District — Raipur (C.G.). Present Address: Dhumer Soni, S/o Thanku Soni, Through — Smt. Sindhu Shukia’ W/o Suryakant Shukla, R!o Hanuman Nagar, Kaiibadi Chowk Raipur, Tehsil and District Raipur (C.G.) Present Address: through Deepak Apartment, Bhudapara, Raipur, Tehsil & District Raipur (C.G.) (Driver of the Mini Bus Bearing Regd. No. CG 04/ZA 0171) Smt. Sindhu Shukla W/o Suryakant Shukla, R/o Hanuman Nagar, Kalibadi Chowk, Raipur, Tehsil and District Raipur (C.G.) Present Address: through Deepak Apartment Bhudapara, Raiur, Tehsil & DistrictRaipur(C.G.) A (Owner of the Mini Bus Bearing Regd. I No; CG 04/ZA 0171) 3 The National Insurance Company Limited, Through its Divisional Manager, The National Insurance Company Limited, ,G.E. Road, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) (insurer of the Mini Bus Bearing Regd. No. CG o4/ZA 0171') Respondents Non-Applicant // s p Appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988. Present : Shri Satyendra Sahu, counsel for the appeHant. None for respondents No.1 & 2 though served. Shri Shree Kumar Agrawal, Senior Counsel with Shri Anand Gupta, counsel for respondent No.3 ORDER (5“‘ May, 2011) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. Appellant/ Claimant Uday Ram Sahu is seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the First Additionai Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur (for short ‘the Tribunai’) vide award dated 19.07.2005, passed in Claim Case No. 1 0/2005. 2) ‘ As against the compensation of Rs.5,01,000/- claimed by the appellant/ claimant by flling a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act for the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 06.07.2003, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.55,000/— as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of ming of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 3) The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence ied before it held that claimant Uday Ram Sahu sustained multiple serious injuries including fractures in the motor accident on 06.07.2003; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent 0 driving of the driver of the offending vehicle minibus bearing registration No.C.G.04ZA—O171; as the above Offending vehicle minibus on the Gate of the accident was insured with the Nationa'i insurance Company Limited and the Insurance Company could not estabiish any breach of the policy Conditions, the Insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimant. 4) As the respondents have not med any appeal against the award, the above findings recorded by the Tribunal have now attained finality. 5) The Tribunal considering the number and nature of the injuries proved to have been sustained by the claimant in the motor accident and the amount proved‘to have been spent on treatment, awarded Rs.35,000/— towards medical expenses; Rs.15,000l- towards loss in the future earning capacity; and Rs.5,000/— towards pain and suffering. The Tribunal, thus, awarded a total sum of Rs.55,000/- as compensation to the ' claimant for the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.55,000/- @ 6% per annum from the date of tiling of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) ‘Shri Satyendra'Sahu, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal has erred in awarding low , compensation of Rs.55,000/~ only though the appellant/claimant sustained multiple serious injuries including fractures in the motor accident resulting in permanent disability to the extent of 46%. 7) Shri Shree Kumar Agrawal, learned Senior Counsel with Shri Anand .Gupta, learned counsel for respondent No.3 the National Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle minibus, on the other hand, supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.55,000/— awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 8) ln a motor accident claim case, what is important is that, the compensation to be awarded by the Courtsfrribunals should be just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the case. It should neither be a meager amount of compensation, nor a Bonanza. 9) ' Now we shall examine as to whether the compensationof Rs.55,000/— awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper \ compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 10) Claimant Uday Ram Sahu was aged about 50 years on the date of the accident. He was a carpenter by occupation. The claimant sustained multiple serious injuries including fracture of his right hand is established from the evidence of AW—2 Dr.A.A.Sain. It is a matter of common knowledge that substantial amount is required to be spent on the treatment of fractures. The claimant, being a carpenter, on account of the fracture of his right hand couldnot have performed his duties as carpenter for a period of about 4 - 6 months, resulting in monetary loss to him. The Tribunal apparently has fallen into error in not awarding any “VP“ sum towards Ioss of income during the period of treatment, conveyance, attendant, and special diet. 11) The compensation of Rs.55,000/— awarded by the Tribunal when examined in the context of the above mentioned broad features of the case, in our opinion, is certainiy on the lower side and deserves to be enhanced suitably. 12) Considering ail the relevant aspects of the matter, we are of the opinion that further award of Rs.20,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation would make the compensation of Rs.55,000/- awarded by the Tribunal as just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 13) ‘The appeal filed by the appellant/ claimant for enhancement of the compensation, therefore, is allowed in part. The claimant is awarded further sum of Rs.20,000/— inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation in addition to the sum of Rs.55,000/— awarded by the Tribunal. 14) Respondent No.3 the National Insurance Company Limited is granted three months’ time for depositing the total sum of Rs.20,000/- before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 15) No order as to costs. Sd/- R.L. Jhanwar Sdl- Judge ' CHIEF JUSTICE