.<•*• <9" o HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENOH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLESHRI N.K. AGARWAL, J. Misc. Appeal (C) No. 147 of 2008 Appellant : Radheshyam Nag s/o Sudhir Nag, Claimant aged about 30 years, caste Nishad, occupation agriculture, r/o village Bade Dhaba, Police Station Basna, Tehsil Basna, district Mahasamund C.G. VERSUS Respondents Non-claimants ••4 •\~. Ghasiram Chouhan, s/o Joidha Chouhan, aged about 33 years, occupation driver, r/o Mahal Para, Saraipali, Tehsil Saraipali, district Mahasamund C.G. (Driver of vehicle Mini Bus bearing registrationNo. C.G. 06/A-8286) Jashwant Singh Saluja s/o Inder Singh Saluja, occupation registered owner of vehicle Mini BusC.G. 06/A- 8286, R/o Village Basna, Tehsil Basna, district Mahasamund C.G. The New India Insurance Company Limited, through Divisional Office, Divisional Manager, Manida Building, Jail Road, Kutchery, Raipur, district Raipur C.G. (Insurer of vehicle Mini Bus bearing registration No. C.G. 06/A-8286) Bajeer Singh Choudhari s/o Mohan Singh Choudhari, aged about 28 years, occupation driver, through M.S. Transport Corporation of India, 17/6, Mathura Road, Faridabad, Hariyana. (Driver of vehicle Trailor Container bearing registration No. H.R. 51/GA- 1437) ri—i^'., 3<S.s •V M.S. Transport Corporation of India Tatibandh, Raipur, District Raipur C.G. Other Address M.S. Transport Corporation of India, 17/6, Mathura Road, Faridabad, Hariyana. (Owner of vehicle Trailor Container bearing registration No. H.R. 51/GA- 1437) The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, through Divisional Manager, Divisional Office, Madina Building, Kutchery Chowk, Jail Road, Raipur, district Raipur C.G. (Insurer owner of vehicle Trailor Container bearing registration No. H.R. 51/GA-1437) Memo ofappeal under Section 173ofthe MotorVehicles Act. Present: Shri Dharmesh Shrivastava, counsel for the appellant. None for respondents No. 1 and 2 though served. Shri Raj Awasthi, counsel for respondent No.3. Shri Mukesh Sharma, counsel for respondents No.4 &5. Shri Shailendra Sharma, counsel for respondent No.6. ORDER (04th May, 2011) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. Appellant/ Claimant Radheshyam Nag is seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.Mahasamund (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 30.10.2006, passed in Claim Case No.22/2006. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.8,00,000/- claimed by the appellanVclaimant by filing a claim petition under Section 166 ofthe Motor Vehides Act for the injuries sustained by him in the motor '\, -°^sa, ?ff tw;"a %;>-i.-^"^! 'tyfs^ accident on 28.10.2005, the Tribunal awardeda total sum of Rs.1,46,192/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% 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 entjre evidence led before it held that claimant Radheshyam Nag sustained multiple serious injuries including fractures in the motor accident on 28.10.2005; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Minibus bearing registration NO.C.G.06/A-8286; as the above offending vehicle Minibus on the date of the accident was insured with the New India 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 filed any appeal against the award, the above findings recorded by the Tribunal have now 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, awarded Rs.1,16,192/- towards medical expenses; Rs.15,000/- towards loss in the future earning capacity; and Rs.15,000/- towards inconvenience caused and monitory loss during the period of treatment. The Tribunal, thus, awarded a total sum of Rs.1,46,192/- as compensation to the claimant for the injuriessustained by him in ^\, \- S^i' ly%^ ft the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.1,46.192/- @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri Dharmesh Shrivastava, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal has erred in awarding low compensation of Rs.1,46.192/- only though the appellant/claimant sustained multiple serious injuries including fractures in the motor accident resulting in permanent disability to the extent of60%. 7) Shri Raj Awasthi, learned counsel for respondent No.3 the New India Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Minibus, on the other hand, supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.1,46.192/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 8) Shri Mukesh Sharma and Shri Shailendra Sharma, learned counsel for respondents No. 4,5 and 6, the driver, owner and insurer of the other vehicle Trailor, also supported the award. 9) In a motor accidentclaimcase, what is important is that, the compensation to be awarded by the Courts/Tribunalsshould 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. , -{?-- \- \, ^ ;^' • ^ K'? s--. x 10) Now we shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.1,46.192/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances ofthe present case. 11) Claimant Radheshyam Nag was aged about 30 years on the date of the accident. He was an agriculturist by occupation. The claimant sustained multiple fractures in the motor accident is established from the evidence of AW2 Dr. Girdhari Chandrakar. It is a matter of common knowledge that substantial amount is required to be spent on the treatment of fractures. The claimant on accountof the fractures could not have undertaken the agricultural operations for a period of about 4-6 months, resulting in monetary loss to him. The Tribunal has certainly erred in not awarding any sum towards loss of income during the period of treatment; conveyance; attendant; and special diet. 12) The compensation of Rs.1,46,192/- awarded by the Tribunal when examined in the context of the above mentioned broad features ofthe case, in our opinion, is certainly on the lower side and deserves to be enhanced suitably. 13) Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, we are of the opinion that further award of Rs.25,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation would make the compensation of Rs.1,46,192/- awarded by the Tribunal as just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. ^-""\ •\~ ] \^ ^5^^!^.^ '•WsSSSh V¥^ v subbu 14) The appeal filed by the appellant/ claimant for enhancement of the compensation, therefore, is allowed in part. The claimant is awarded further sum of Rs.25,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation in addition to the sum of Rs.1,46,192/- awarded by the Tribunal. 15) Respondent No.3 the New India Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.25,000/- before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 16) No order as to costs. __—— Sd/- ChiefJustice Sd/- N.K.Agarwal Judge '••.. Y ^-