^ K^ ^" €. Q3) HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVLSIONBENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA,CJ. HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J Appellant Respondents Misc. Appeal (0 No. 369 of 2007 Radhelal Sahus/o Shiv Prasad Sahu, aged about 37 years, r/o Village Chandanbirahi, Tehsil Gurur, district Durg C.G. VERSUS 1 Ammulal Yadav, s/o Pusulal, aged about 35 years r/o Shaktinagar, district Durg C.G. 2 S. Buta Singh, through S. Succha Singh R/o Santrabadi, Durg, District Durg C.G. 3. The Oriental Insurahce Co. Ltd. behind AmarTalkies Dhamtari C.G. Miscellaneous Appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act Present : Shri Vimlesh Bajpai and Shri K.K. Dewangan*, counsel for the appellant. Shri M.L. Saket, counsel for respondent No.1. Shri Sudhir Agrawal and Shri P. Dutta, counsel for respondent No.3. ORDER >th (28tnApril,2011) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupt?, C.J. Appellant \Radhelal Sahu is seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, ,N ^•^, Dhamtari (for short the Tribunal') vide award dated 10.01.2007, passed in Claim Case No.23/2006. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.15,20,000/- claimed by the appellanVclaimant by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for the injuries sustained by him in the mqtor accident on 29.12.2004; the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.62,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of the filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 3) The Tribunal 6n a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held that claimant Radhelal Sahu sustained multiple serious injuries including fractures in the motor accident on 29.12.2004; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Metador bearing registration No.CG07-ZB/0257; as the above offending vehicle Metador on the date of the accident was insured with the Oriental Insurance Company Limited, and the Insurance Company could not establish any breach of the policy conditions, the Insurance Company was liable to pay the compensation to the claimant. 4) As the respondents have not filedany appeal against the award, the above findings recorded by the Tribunal have now attained finality. 5) The Trjbunal considering the number and nature of the injuries provedvto have been sustained by the claimant in the motor ' \ .. accident and the amount proved to have beein spent on treatment awarded Rs.48,000/- towards loss in the future earning capacity; ^^ •i 1 1 i w-y :'%ts-^^f i Rs.9,000/- tpwards medical expenses; and Rs.5,000/- towards pain and suffering. The Tribunal, thus, awarded a total sum of Rs.62,000/- 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.62,000/- @ 6% per annum from the date of the filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 5) Shri Vimlesh Bajpai and Shri K.K. Dewangan, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not awarding any sum towards the loss of income during the period of treatment; attendant, conveyance and spectal diet; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.62,000/- only. 6) Shri Sudhir Agrawal and Shri P. Dutta, learned counsel for respondent No.3 Oriental Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Metador, on the other hand supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.62,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensatjon in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 7) Shri M.L. Saket, learned counsel for respondent No.1 Ammulal Yadav, driver of the offending vehicle Metador also supported the award. 8) Claimant Radhelal Sahu was aged about 37 years on the date of the a^cident. He was a coolie/ hamal by occupation. The claimant sustained fractures in the motor accident is established '\ .. from the evidence of AW2 Dr. Iqbal Parvez who treated the claimant for the injuries and fractures sustained by him in the motor ^^iHlS A "^ 4|g|^S^ '^•^-^^ 4 @ ^. accident. It is a matter of common knowledge that substantiat amount is required to be spent on treatment of fractures. The claimant on account of the fractures could not have performed his duties as coolie/ hamal for a period of 4 to 6 months resulting in monitory loss to him. The Tribunal has certainly erred in not awarding any sum towards loss of income during the period of treatment and for attendant, special diet and conveyance. 9) The compensation of Rs.62,000/- awarded by the Tribunal, when examined in the context of the above mentioned broad features of the case, in our opinion, is certainly on the lower side and deserves to be enhanced suitably. 10) 'Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, we are of the opinion that further award of Rs.15,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation would make the compensation of Rs.62,000/- awarded by the Tribunal as just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 11) The appeal filed by the appellant/claimant for enhancement of the compensation, therefore, is allowed in part. The claimant js awarded.further sum of Rs.15,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhahced amount of compensation in addition to the sum of Rs.62,000/- awarded bythe Tribunal. 12) Respondent No.3 the Oriental Insurance Company Limited js granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.15,000/- before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 13) No order as to costs. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge padma \,