^<@ IN THE HIGH COURT QF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH f-CP-^^ MISELLANEOUS APPEAL (C) N0. - \ u 'l " OF 2( (MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988) APPELLANT AIMANT ^t RESPONDENTS J?«5N-CLAIMANTS -€hetaNand Sharma, S/o Late Shri Bujlal Sharma , aged about 31 years, R/o- Tikrapara, Raipur, Tehsil & District - Raipur (C.G.) VERSUS 1.^ Dushyant Patel S/o Shri Padumlal Patel R/o- Village & Post- Dhaneli, Police Station -Dharsiwa^ District- Raipur (C.G.) (Driver ofMitador Vehicle bearing registration No. C.G. 04/G 1270) ..,.^.^ {y-^^^-- ...-""^ -T\^' -^^^^' ^ ^fy"" Ramesh Kumar Sahu S/o Salik Ram Sahu, R/o Phool Market Gali, Jorapara, Raipur, Teh. & Distt. - Raipur (C.G.) (Registered Qwner of Mitador Vehicle bearing registration No.C.G.04/0 1270) The New India Insurance Conipany ^' Limited, Through Divisional Manager, Divisional Office , RDA Building, Bajrang Market, G.E. Road, Raipur, Tehsil & District- Raipur (C.G.) (Insurur of Mitador Vehicle bearing registration No. C.G. 04/G 1270) MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 Claim before the claim Tribunal Claim awarded by the claim Tribunal Claim for enhancement ofthe amount/appeal value at Rs. 6,00,000/- Rs. 1,25,000/- Rs. 3,^0,000/- f€^\ i^sk ] V^-l/<^. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Sinale Bench: Hon'ble Shri Justice Radhe Shvam Sharma Miscellaneous Apoeal (C.) No.1078 of 2008 Cheta Nand Sharma versus Dushyant Patel and others Appellant Respondents Present: Shri Dharmesh Shrivastava, counsel for the appellant. Shri Deepak Gupta, counsel for respondent No.3. None for other respondents. Miscellaneous Appeal under Section 1 73 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 ORAL ORDER (Passed on 3rd August, 2011) By the instant appeal, claimant Cheta Nand Sharma seeks enhancement of the compens^tion awarded by award dated 24-2- 2007 passed by 3 Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Raipur in Claim Case No.9/2006. 2. Case of the claimant, as stated in the claim petition, is that on the date of accident, i.e., 12-2-2006, claimant Cheta Nand Sharma was going from his home-village to Village Bhotha on a motor cycle Suzuki Max-100 bearing registration No.CG 04 ZH 6783. As soon as he reached near Village Khairjhiti, a Metador bearing registration No.CG 04 G 1270, which was being driven by non- claimanVrespondent No.1 Dushyant Patel rashly and negligently and which wascoming from Rajim, dashed the motor cycle. In the accident, the claimant sustained grievous injuries on his person. His /'1^'^ v:^i^~':>-^ Sl^ left leg was fractured/crushed. He had also sustained injuries on his waist and other parts of the body. He was taken to Kurud Hospital for treatment. The accident was reported to Police Station Magarlod. At the time of accident, the Metador was owned by non- claimant/respondent No.2 Ramesh Kumar Sahu and was insured with non-claimant/respondent No.3 the New India Insurance Company Limited. The claimrant preferred a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (henceforth 'the Act') claiming compensation of Rs.6,00,000/-. 3 . The Claims Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.1,25,000/- as compensation in favour of the claimant fastening liability to satisfy the award on the non-claimants, i.e., driver, owner and insurer ofthe Metador, jointly and severally. 4. Shri Dharmesh Shrivastava, learned counsel for the appellant/claimant has argued that the Claims Tribunal has grossly erred in not accepting permanent disability of the appellant and it has also committed error in not awarding any amount under the head loss of future income. 5. Per contra, Shri Deepak Gupta, learned counsel for respondent No.S/insurer of the Metador has supported the impugned award and submitted that the award does not call for interference by this Court. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. The Claims Tribunal has held in paragraph 13 of the '•\ ' impugned award that the appellant/claimant sustained 45% permanent disability, due to which, he has suffered loss of future physical capability. Including the amount of Rs.3,009/- awarded under the head medical expenses, the Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.1,25,000/- as compensation in favour of the appellanVclaimant. 7. Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, 1 am of the opinion that the compensation of Rs.1,25,000/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is on lower side and deserves to be enhanced to some extent. Therefore, an additional sum of Rs.10,000/- is awarded to the appellant/claimant under the head loss of future income inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation. 8. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The appellanVclaimant is awarded a sum of Rs. 10,0007- under the head loss of future income inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation, in addition to the sum of Rs.1,25,000/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal. Rest of the conditions mentioned in the impugned award shall remain intact. The driver, owner and insurer of the Metador shall deposit the amount of enhanced award of Rs.10,000/- along with interest before the Claims Tribunal jointly and severally within a period of two months from today. No order as to costs. Sd/- R.S. Sharma Judge Gopal