(£) HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J Misc Appeal (Cl No. 698 of 2010 ApDeilant Ciaimant -^' Surykant Dhiwar, s/o Pitairam Dhiwar, aged about 19 years, occupation labour, r/o Village Akaltara, PS Ratanpur, District Bilaspur (CG) Respondents Non-applicants k -:^^ VERSUS Sharif Ansari s/o Nanhu Shekh IVIuslman, aged about 24 years, r/o village Nimiyadiha, PS Garwa, District - Garwa (Jharkhand) at present near Bus Stand Village Beltara, PS Ratanpur, District Bilaspur CG (Driver of vehicle Truck bearing No.CG 10/C - 0122) Krishran Kumar Jaiswal, s/o Dhanjai Jaiswal, r/o Warehouse Road, Bilaspur Tahsil & District Bilaspur (CG) (Owner of vehicle Truck bearing No.CG 10/C - 0122) The New India Insurance Company Ltd., through Jhonal Manager, Jhonal Office Opposite to Rajive Plaza 2nd flower Rama Trade Center, New Bus Stand, Bilaspur Tahs'il & District - Bilaspur (CG) IVIiscellaneous Appeal under Section 173 of IVIotor Vehicles Act Present : Smt Kiran Jain, counsel for the appellant. Shri Somnath Verma, counsel for respondent No.2. Shri Ajay Mishra, counsel for respondent No.3. ^sf-m 16..-,.^%^ S 1 t? SSil S ^ ^ v^y ~^C.Kssy MACNo.698 of 2010 @ ORDER .c c ^- '^ (05WSeptember,2G11) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. Appellant / Claimant Surykant Dhiwar is seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the 1st Additionai Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 08.04.2010, passed in Claim Case No.22/2009. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.7,39,000/-, claimed by the appellant/claimant, by filing a claim petitionunder Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 15.09.2008, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.51,000/- as compensation alongwith 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 New India Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Truck bearing registration No.CG 10 C/0122 liable to pay the compensation to the daimant. 4) As the insurerof the above offending vehicte Truck has not filed any appea! chatlenging 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, ^T^\ ":/r.^€^^ % i '. 1 l"as»ftj •^..// ^l MACNo.698 of 2010 c c ^^ ;>.-. awarded Rs.16,000/- towards medical expenses; Rs.15,000/- towards grievous injury and the disability; Rs.10,000/- for pain and suffering; Rs.10,000/- for special diet, conveyance and loss of income. The Tribunal, thus, awarded a total sum of Rs.51 ,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.51,000/- @ 7% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Smt Kiran Jain, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Tribuna! has erred in awarding low compensation of Rs.51,000/- only, though the appellant sustained multiple serious injuries including fractures in the motor accident resulting in permanentdisability to the extent of 20%. 7) Shri Ajay Mishra, learned counsel for respondent No.3 the New India Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Truck on the other hand supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.51,000/- awarded by the Tribunat is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 8) Shri Somnath Verma, learned counsel for respondent No.2 Krishran Kumar Jaiswal, the owner of the offending vehicle Truck also supported the award. 9) Claimant Surykant Dhiwar was aged about 19 years on the date of the accident. He was a labour/painter by occupation. The claimant sustained multiple serious injuries including fracture of his .^n1 i ^y'Si^ I ^.:: '^^•^'^& fe .^/^ ^ MACNo.698 of 2010 <.. L A^ ^ right Tibia bone js established from the evidence of AW/2 Dr SS Bhatia. It is a matter of common knowledge that substantial amount is required to be spent on the treatment of fractures. The claimant, being a labour/painter, on account of the fracture of his right Tibia bone could not have performed his duties as tabour/painter for a period of 3-4 months resulting in monitory loss to him. 10) The Tribunal apparently has erred in not awarding any sum towards attendant and in awarding low cum of Rs.10,000/- only towards special diet, loss of income during the period of treatment and conveyance. 11) The compensation of Rs.51,000/- awarded by the Tribunal, when examined in the context of the above mentioned broad features of the case, in our opinion, is on the lower side and deserves to be enhanced suitably. 12) Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, we are of the opinion that further award of Rs.21,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation would make the compensation of Rs.51,000/- awarded by the Tribunal as just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 13) The appeal filed by the appeliant/claimant for enhancement of the compensation, therefore, is allowed in part. The claimant is awarded further sum of Rs.21 ,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation in addition to the sum of Rs.51,000/- awarded by the Tribunat. I? %i'ft:.!'^;tk .1 (S) MACNo.698 of 2010 k padrr^ 14) Respondent No.3 the New India Insurance Company is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.21,000/- before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 15) No order as to costs. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge ^