HIGH CQURT OF CHHAmSGARH AT BILASPUR MlscApnealNo. 110/2005 SB:Hoa'ble Shrl Justice R.L. Jhanwar 0 i-. APPELLAMT Knshaa Kumar Kashyap Versus RESPONDENTS Murari Lal Soni and others ORDER Post &r oidcr on ^.3.2011 Sd/- R.L. Jhanwar Judge ^i;^::^:,:-;. siMsB 9BWI HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPCR SINGLE BENCH: HQN'BLE SHKIR.L.JHANWAR, J. MIsc. Appeal No.llO of 2005 APPELLANT Original AppUcaat •-?. ^ Krishiia Kumar Kashyap aged about 36 years, s/o Shri Maunulal Kashyap R/o viUage Bhedimuda, Ratanpur, P.S. Rataapiir, District Bilaspur (CG) y VBRSUS RESPONDENTS : 1 Muran Lal Soni aged about 40 Origiaal Noa- years, s/o'Bhrosi Lal Soai R/o applicants Gond Para BUaspur (CG) 2 Anil Kumar Kateliha aged about 30 years, s/o late Banshilal Kateliha R/o Subhash Nagar, Goiid Para P.S. City Kotwali, BUaspur Tah and District Bilaspur (CG) 3 The New India Insuraace Colupany Ltd. Through Braach Maaager, Brauch ofBce Rajendia Nagar Chowk, Bilaspur (CG) MISCBLLANEOU8 APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VBHICLES ACT; 1988 Appearance; Shri Surul Otwani and Shri Sushil Sahu, counsel for fhe appeUaut. None for respondents No. 1 aad 2. Shri Sreekuinar Agrawal, Sr. Advocate with Shri Anand Gupta, counsel for respondent No.3. '^ w R.L.Jhanwar, J QRDER (.2.2011) '^ - AppeUant-Krishna Kuinar is seekuig enhanceiaent of the compensatioa awarded by the 9th Additioaal Motor Aecident daiTTis Tribuna^FTC) Bflaspur (for short 'fhe Tribunal') vide awaid dated 30.9.2004, passed in Claim Case No.44/2004. 2. As against fhe coinpensation ofRs.1,81,000/-, clauned by the appellaat/clauaaut by fi1mg a claim petition under Section 166 ofthe Motor Vehicles Act for the iajuries sustained by him iu fhe motor accident on 30.5.2003, ftie Tribuaal awarded a total sum of Rs.94,059/- as conipcnsation to the clauaaat along with iuterest @ 9% p.a, frovi the date of filing of the claim petition tiU the date ofactual payinent. 3. The Tribunal on. a close scrutmy ofthe entire evidenee ted before it held fhat the claimant sustained multiple injuries wifh fi-acture in his leg ia the iiiotoraccideD.t on 30.5.2003; fhe accident occurred due to rash aad negUgent dnviitg ofthe driver of the ofifendiag vehicle - Bus bearing registration No. CG10/ZA/0305; as fhe ofFendmg vehicle Bus on the date ofthe accident was iasured wifh tbe New India lusuraace Couipaay Limited, the Insurance Coiupany was liable to pay coinpensation to the claunaat. 4. As the respondents have not filed any appeal agaiast the award, fhe above findiags recorded by fhe Tribunal have now attained finaMty. 5. The Tribunal considenug the nuinber and nature of iajunes proved to have been sustained by the claimaat ia the niotor accident aad the amoimt proved to have been spcnt on his treatment, awarded Rs.2,000/- for attendant, Rs.3000/- for ^''-^, special diet, Rs.2000/- for conveyance, Rs.15,000/- for 20%> disabiMty on accouat of firacture of tibia aad fibula bones, Rs.7,200/- for loss of iucome for 6 months, Rs.10,000/- for pam. aad suffering, Rs.5000/- for disableaient for soiae tune and Rs.40,000/- on account of20% permanent disabiMty. The Tribunal, thus awarded a total sum of Rs.94,059/-/- as coinpensation to the claunant. The Tribunal further direeted payincnt ofinterest on fhe above amount ofcomLpensation @ 9% per annuni froui ftie date of filing of the claim petition tiU fhe date of actual payinent. • 6. Learued couasel for the appeUant argued that Tribunal has awarded less eoinpensation even afier 2CR<> disability aad loss ofiacoiae, which ffae claimaat suffers during fhe course of treatinent, therefore, ftie amount of compensation sh.ould be enlianced. 7. On the ofher haad, leamed coimsel for respondent No. 3/ New India Insurauce Coinpany Lunlted supported tfae award aad contended that the compensation ofRs.94.059/- awarded by ttie Tribun.al is just aad proper coinpensation in fhe facts aud ctrcunislanees of the prescat case. 8. The claimant was aged about 36 years on fhe date of accident. He used to eara his livelihood by doing work oflabour. He sustained iajunes iu his leg and fiacture oftibia aad fibula bones, both the bones were divided iato 2 parts and a rod aad screw was inserted in. the leg; and the claunaat sustained 20% disability. No doubt, certainly he was not able to go on work for _about 6 monttis, fherefore, not only he, but his family meiubers had also suffered, as fhe iajuxies sustaiaed by the claunant were of:serious natuie, 9. After perusal of record aad on due consideratiou of thc subnussions of leamed couxisel for fhe pardes, I am of fhe opmion that further award of Rs.11,000/- iuGlusive of iaterest coniponeut on the enhaaced amount of coiupensation would niake the conipeiisation of Rs.94,059/- awarded by the Tribunal as just and proper compensation in the facts and circuiastaaces offhe present case. 10. The appeal filed by the appeUant/clainiant for enliaiiceiuent offhe coiapensation, therefore, is allowed ia part. The appeUaat/claunan.t is awaided furfher suni of Rs. 11,000/- iuclusive of iuterest coniponent oa fhe enhanced amount of corapensation, iu addition to fhe sum. of Rs.94,059/- awarded by the Tribiuial. 11. Respondent No. 3 thc New India Insiirance Coiapaay Limited is granted ttiree months' time for depositmg fhe sum. of Rs.11,000/- before flie conceram.g Clauas Tnbuaal. 12. No order as to costs. Sd/- R.L. .Biahwar Judge