<iA J Ciaimant ^-.. iVIisc (C) No. 1459 of Rajesh Kumar Jain, age about 35 years, s/o Sugandh Chand Jain, R/o Near Ganj Mandi Basantpur, Rajnandgaon (CG) At present R/o V/ill - Sambalpur; Tah & PS Dongergaon, District Rajnandgaon (CG) ^.- Hemant Kumar Shendey, age about 20 years, s/o Makhanla! Shendey, r/o Viil Churiya, Tah & PS Rajnandgaon (CG) Churiya, District Nationai insurance Co Ltd., through Branch Office, Rajnandgaon (CG) Present : Shri Rakesh Thakur, counsel for the appeltant. Shri Waslm K41ya, counsel for respondent No.1. Shri Goutam KhetrapaE, counsel for respondent Mo.2. (12th September, 2011) The following order of the Court was passed by c. ^^'A.ff&Sfis^^siS' y^ MACNo. 1459 of 2009 afi Appeliant / CIaimant Rajesh Kumar Jaln is seeklng enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Additionai Motor Accident Ciaims Tribuna!, Rajnandgaon (for short 'the Tribuna!') vide aws.rd 07.07.2009, in C!aim Case No.122/2008. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.8,48,000/-, claimed by the appe!!ant/c!aimant, by fiiing a claim petition under Section 1 66 of the Motor Vehiclss Act, for the injuries sustalned by him in the motor accident on 06.07.2007, the Tribunai awarded a total sum of Rs.1,26.372/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the ciaim petition til! the date of actua! payment. 3) The Tribunai on a ciose scrutiny of the entire evidence !ed before it heid the Nationa! insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Tata ASE beai'Eng registration No.CG 08 B /1618 iiable to' pay the cornpensation to the daimant. 4) As the insurer of the above offending vehicle Tata ASE has not fiied any appeat chailenging the above findjng recorded by the Tribunal, the same now has attained finality. 5) The Tribunai considering the number and nature of the injuries proved to have been sustained by the dalmant in the motor accident; the resultant permanent disabjlity to the extent of 20%; and the amount proved to have been spent on treatment, awarded Rs.60,372/- towards medicai expenses; Rs.20,000/- towards permanent disability; Rs.15,000/- towards ioss of income during the course of_treatment; Rs.15,000/- for future medica! expenses; ^^^- f€l^ 1. ^t ::1) •-^^ MACNo.1459 of 2009 <b\ Rs.10,000/- for pain and suffering, specia! diet and attendant; and Rs.6,000/- for conveyance. The Tribunai, thus, awarded a tota! sum of Rs.1,26,372/- as compensation to the daimant for the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident. T'ne Tribuna! further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.1,26,372/- @ 6% per annum from the date of fliing oft'ne claim petltion tili the date ofactual payment. 6) Shri Rakesh Thakur, iearned counsel for the appe!!ant submitted that the Tribuna! has erred in awardlng iow sum of Rs.10,000/- oniy towards paEn and suffering; special diet; and attendant; and in awarding compensation of Rs.1,26,372/- oniy though the appeiiant/ciaimant sustained muitiple serious injuries inciuding fractures of his left tlbia and fibula bones In the motor acddent. 7) Shri Goutam Khetrapai, learned counsel for respondent No.2 the National insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicie Tata ASE on the other hand supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.1,26,372/- awarded by the cannot be termed as inadequate so as to warrant enhancement jn this appeai. 8) Shri Wasirn Miya, learned counsel for respondent No.1 Hemant Kumar Shendey, the owner-cum-driver of the offending vehicie Tata ASE, a!so supported the award. 9) Ciaimant Rajesh Kumar Jain vi/as about 35 years on the date of the acddent. He was running a Kirana Shop in the viilage. The claimant sustained multjpfe serious injuries including ^^•^•w;-.-..;<"-..;-;: 4 MACNo.1459 of 2009 y^ fractures of his left tibia and fibula bones in the motor accident is borne out from the evidence availabie on record. !t is a matter of common knowiedge that substantial amount is required to be spent on the treatrnent of fractures. The ciaimant couid not have attended his shop on account of the fractures of his left tibia and fibuia bones for a period of 2-3 months, resuiting in monitory loss to him. 10) The Tribunal certalnly has erred in awarding low sum of Rs. 10.000/- oniy towards pain and suffering, special diet and attendant. 11) The compensatlon of Rs.1,26,372/- awarded by the Tribunal, when examlned in the context of the above mentioned broad features of the case, In our opinion, is somewhat on the lower side and deserves to be enhanced to some exte.nt. 12) Considering ai! the relevant aspects of the matter, we are of the opinion that further award of Rs.11,000/- inc!usive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation would make the compensation of Rs.1,26.372/- awarded by the Tribunal as just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 13) The appea! filed by the appellant/ciaimant for enhancement of the compensation, therefore, is allowed in part. The ciaimant is awarded further sum of Rs.1 1,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation in addition to the sum of Rs.1,26,372/- awarded by the Tribunal. ^^.. subbu 5 MACNo. 1459 of 2009 ^ 14) Respondent No.2 the National insurance Company is granted three months' time for depositing the totai sum of Rs.11,0007- before the concerning Claims Tribunai. 15) No order as to costs. Sd/- ChiefJustice Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge •%.>'• •:^^^^.'^