.\ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DJVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J Misc. Appeal No. 549 of 2006 Appellant Claimant Muratidhar Yadav, S/o Manarakhan Yadav, aged about 24 years, R/o Amapara, Raipur, PA Village - Jara, PS Kharora, Tahsil - Baiauda Bazar, Oistt Raipur (CG) VERSUS Respondents Non - applicants 3. Gokul Baghel @ Vikas Baghel, S/o Shri Laxman Baghel, R/o Kalibadi, Raipur, Distt - Raipur (CG) Ramesh Kumar Sachdeo, S/o Shri Narayan Das Sachdeo, R/o Kalibadi Chowk, Raipur, Distt - Raipur (CG) Branch Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Krishna Kachahari Chowk, Raipur (CG) Miscellaneous Appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act Present : Shri SC Verma, counsel for the appetlant. Shri Dashrath Gupta and Shri Anand Gupta, counsel for respondent No.3. ORDER ith {19mADril,201D .* £^c^ ^' '^^^.^"^ f \Jv"€/' »Aa..-.stI"'-" The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. Appellant/ Claimant Murlidhar Yadav is seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Second Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur (for short 'the Tribunat') vide award dated 18.10.2005, passed in Claim Case No.36/2005. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.4,58,000/-, claimed by 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 11 .03.2004, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.45,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actuat payment. 3) Shri S.C. Verma, leamed counsel for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal has erred in awarding low compensation of Rs.45,000/- only, though the Tribunal itself found in para 11 of the award that the claimant spent Rs.37,000/- on the treatment.. 4) Shri Dashrath Gupta and Shri Anand Gupta, learned counsel for respondent No.3 the United India Insurance Company Limited, on the other hand supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.45,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. '•3. ^' s Sta&'s & ""^'-.f'/K^. ;-f '",,:.. lA.^'1':^' '^Bb..;- .../.--!J"" ./ 'J7<3 5) In 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. It should neither be a meager amount of compensation, nor a bonanza. 6) Now, we shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.45,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 7) Claimant Muralidhar Yadav was aged about 24 years on the date of the accident. He was an electrician by occupation. The claimant suffered serious injuries in the motor accident is established from the evidence of the claimant himself and the evidence of AW2 Dr. Ajay Kumar. He was operated twice for the internal injuries leading to rupture of his internal organs. Though the claimant ctaimed that he became impotent on account of those injuries, the medical evidence of AW2 Dr. Ajay Kumar does not corroborate him in that behalf. The Tribunal itself found in para 11 of the award that the bitls and vouchers produced by the ciaimant before the Tribunal in regard to the medical expenses were to the extent of Rs.37,200/-. This would indicate that the Tribunal has awarded only Rs.7,800/- towards pain and suffering; conveyance; attendant; special diet; and loss of income during the period of treatment. 8) The compensation of Rs.45,000/- 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. 9) 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.45,000/- awarded by the Tribunal as just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 10) The appeal filed by the appellant/claimant for enhancement ofthe compensation, therefore, is allowed inipart. 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.45,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. 11) Respondent No.3 the United India Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.20,000/- before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 12) No order as to costs. ——— Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- Rangnath Chandrakar Judge subbu