HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLESHRIRAJEEVGUPTA,CJ. HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J Appellant £ i Respondents Misc Appeal (CV No. 1541 of 20Q9 Kalicharan Ogre, S/o Late Firtu Ram Ogre, aged about 40 years, R/o Village- Devari (Pandhi), P.S. & Tahsil-Seepat, District-Bilaspur (C.G.) VERSUS 1 Bhagirathi Patel, S/o Sahetru Patel, R/o Village-Koni, P.S.-Masturi, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) (Driver, Vehicle Tractor No.C.G-10/A- 5046) 2 Bhagbali Patel, S/o Kejuram Patel, R/o Village-Koni, P.S.-Masturi, District- Bilaspur(C.G.) (Driver, Vehicle Tractor No.C.G.IO/A- 5046) 3 United India Insurance Company Limited through Branch Manager, Branch Office Rajendra Nagar chowk, Bilaspur, Tahsil & District-Bilaspur Miscellaneous Appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act Present : Shri Goutam Khetrapal and Shri Rakesh Sahu, counsel for the appellant. Shri Vivek Shrivastava, counsel for respondents No.1 & 2. Shri Dashrath Gupta, counsel for respondent No.3. ORDER (16tnAugust,2011) M.A.C.No.1541 of 2009 ,. itt The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. AppellanVclaimant Kalicharan Ogre is seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 17.11.2009, passed in Claim Case No. 18/2009. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.4,65,000/-, 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 motor accident on 01.02.2009, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.50,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 3) The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held the United India Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Tractor bearing registration No.CG-IO/A-5046 liable to paythe compensation to the claimant. 4) As the insurer of the above offending vehicle Tractor has not filed any appeat challenging the above finding recorded by the Tribunal, the same, now has 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 lump-sum of Rs.50,000/- 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 ..^^^^^ WS^^ j ^ '^-- '^^^^ MAC.No. 1541 of 2009 1.- t .-J of compensation of Rs.50,000/- @ 7% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri Goutam Khetrapal and Shri Rakesh Sahu, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal has erred in awarding low compensation of Rs.50,000/- only. 7) Shri Dashrath Gupta, learned counsel for respondent No.3 the United India Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Tractor, on the other hand supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.50,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 8) Shri Vivek Shrivastava, learned counsel for respondent No.1 Bhagirathi Patel and respondent No.2 Bhagbali Patel, the driver and owner of the offending vehicle Tractor also supported the award. 9) Claimant Kalicharan Ogre was aged about 40 years on the date of the accident. He was a Mason by occupation. The claimant susfained fracture of his right ulna bone is established from the evidence of AW/2 Dr. Vijay Kumar Mishra. It is a matter of common knowledge that substantial amount is required to be spent on the treatment of fracture. The claimant, being a Mason could not have performed his duties as Mason on account of the fracture of his right ulna bone for a period of 3-4 months resulting in Cponitory loss to him. 10) The compensation of Rs.50,000/- awarded by the Tribunal, when examined in the context of the above mentioned broad ^'.^ .^'" ,.^^%,. ;j? 1 ^ •—-- ^i J ^^' .^ ':^^. MAC.No. 1541 of 2009 features of the case, in our opinion, is somewhat on the lower side and deserves to be enhanced to some extent. 11) Considering all 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.50,000/- awarded by the Tribunal as just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 12) The appeal filed by the appellanVclaimant 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.50,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. 13) Respondent No.3 the United India Insurance Company Limjted is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.20,000/- before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 14) No order as to costs. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge nimmi