HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BASPUR DIVISION BENCH ¢ CORAM: HON’BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, CJ. HON’BLE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINHA, J. Misc. Appeal No. 39 of 2003 . MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT a Present: Shri Awadh Tripathi and Shri Wasim Miya, counsel for the appellant. Shri Goutam Khetrapal, counsel for respondent No.3. None for respondents No. 1, 2 & 4. IL Appellant : Krishna Ram s/o. Sahdeo, aged' Claimant about 4O years, r/o village Ashra, Thana Daundilohara, Tahsil Daundilohara, distt. Durg C.G. VERSUS Respondents 1. Narayan Rao s/o. Appa Rao, R/o Non-claimants Sankurti Street Salur, distt. Vijayanagaram A.P. 2. L.C.H. Panudu s/o Appa Rao, R/o Main Roadl Kotvalsa, distt. Vijayanagaram AP 3. National Insurance Co. Ltd., Branch Office No.1, Dwarika Nagar, distt. Visakhapatnam A.P. Dhirendra Kumar s/o Bhawanji, age 4,0 years, 'r/o Shalewar Para, Dhamtari C.G. 5. Shanker Lal s/o Manrakhan Lal, age 38 years, r/o Station Para Ward, Dhamtari C.G. 6. The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Branch Office Dhamtari, distt. Dhamtari C.G. Shri Goutam Bhaduri, counsel for respondent No.5. Shri Suryakant Mishra, counsel for respondent No.6. ORDER (11th March, 2011) The following order of the Court was passed b‘y Rajeev Gupta, C.J. Appellant/ Claimant Krishna Ram is seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Additional Motor Acoi‘dent Claims Tribunal, Dhamtari (for short ‘the Tribunal’) vide award l dated 10.08.2002, passed in Claim Case No.200/2002. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.23‘05,000/- claimed by ll the appellant/ claimant by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act for the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 02.05.2000, the Tribunalrawarded a total sum of Rs.95,212/- as compensation along with interest @ 7.5% per l u ix 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 that claimant Krishna Ram sustained multiple serious injuries in the motor accident on 02.05.2000; the injuries and fractures sustained by the claimant in the motor accident led to amputation of his right leg above knee, resulting in permanent disability to the extent of 50%; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Truck bearing registration No.A.P.51—T/2749; as the above offending a ’ W s. @ vehicle Truck on the date of the accident Was insured with the National Insurance Company Limited and the insurance Company could not establish any breach of the policy conditions, the insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimant. 4) As the respondents have not tiled any appeal against the award, the above findings recorded by the Tribunal have now 4 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 his treatment, awarded Rs.72,000/— towards loss in the future earning capacity on account of the amputation of his right leg; Rs.22,712/— towards medical expenses; and Rs.500/— towards pain and suffering. The Tribunal, thus, awarded a total sum of Rs.95,212/- as compensation to the claimant for the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident. The Tribunal futther directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.95,212l— @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri Awadh Tripathi and Shri Wasim Miya, learned counsel ‘for the appellant placing reliance on the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Nagappa Vs.‘Gurudayal Singh and others, reported in AIR ‘2003- SC 674, submitted that the Tribunal has erred in awarding low compensation of Rs.95,212/— only, though the appellant/ claimant on account of the amputation of his right ieg above knee has been rendered unfit to pursue his occupation of buying and selling of cattle. o 7) Shri Goutam Khetrapal, learned counsel for respondent No.3 the National insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Truck, on the other hand, supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.95,212/— awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 8) Shri Goutam Bhaduri, learned counsel for respondent No.5, owner of the Jeep in which the claimant was travelling and Shri Suryakant Mishra, learned counsel for respondent No.6, the insurer of the said Jeep also supported the award. 9) ln a motor accident claim case, what is important is that, the compensation to be awarded by the Courts/Tribunals should be just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the case. lt should neither be a meager amount of compensation, nor a Bonanza. 10) Now we shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.95,212l— awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 11) Claimant Krishna Ram was aged about 40 years on the date of the accident. Apart from being an agriculturist, he was also 1 dealing in buying and selling of cattle. Claimant Krishna Ram suffered multiple serious injuries including fractures leading to h ‘@ amputation of his right leg above knee is estabhshed from the evidence of AW1 Dr. S.K. Chatterjee. It is a matter of common knowledge that substantiai amount is required to be spent on the treatment of fractures. The claimant would suffer for whole of his life on account of the amputation of his right leg above knee not only physically but mentally also. 12) The compensation of Rs.95,212/— awarded by the Tribunal i when examined in the context of the above mentioned broad features of the case and the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Nagappa Vs. Gurudayal Singh and others, (supra) in our opinion, is certainly on the lower side and deserves to be enhanced suitably. 13)' Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter including the fact that the injuries and fractures sustained by the claimant in the motor accident led to amputation of his right leg above knee, we are of the opinion that further award of Rs.1 ,00,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation would make the compensation of Rs.95,212/- awarded by the Tribunal as just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 14.) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellant/ claimant for enhancement ‘of the compensation is allowed in part. The claimant is awarded further sum of Rs.1,00,000/— inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation in addition to the sum of Rs.95,212/- awarded by the Tribunal. o 7i ® 15) Respondent No.3 the National Insurance Company Limited is granted three months’ time for depositing the total sum of Rs.1 ,00,000/— before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 7 LL .7 . I 16) No order as to costs. M i Sd/- Sd/- i Sunil Kumar Sinha CHIEF JUsTICE r Judge