V'. v ^^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J. Misc. Appeal (0 No. 530 of2010 Appellant (Claimant) Respondents Non-Claimants Basant Kumar Joshi, S/o Anandram Joshi, aged about 37 years, Oecupation - Labourer, R/o - Village - Kampa, Police Station, Tahsil & District - Mahasamund (C.G.) VERSUS Uttam Sahu, S/o Sudarshan Sahu, aged ahout 32 years, Occupation - Driver, R/o - Village -Rajasewai, Police Station - Pithora, District - Mahasamund (C.G.) (Driver of vehicle Maruti Swift bearing registration No. R.J.14/CC/9997) Dr. Sanjay Prabhune, S/o Shashikumar Prabhune, aged about 42 years, R/o - Rawanbhata, Pithora, Police Station - Pithora, District-Raipur(C.G.) (Registered owner of vehicle Maruti Swift bearing registration No. R.J.14/CC/9997) The Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited, through Branch Manager, Branch Office, Shiv Mohan Bhawan, Vidhan Sabha Road, Pandri, Raipur, Tahsil & District - Raipur (C.G.) (Insurer of vehicle Maruti Swift bearing registration No. R.J.14/CC/9997) hflisc.ADpeal under Section 173 ofthe Motor Vehicle Act. N r""^^. '^^^ '^ •^ -'.^ M.A.C.No.530of2010 V, Present: Shri Shivendu Pandya, counsel for the appellant. Shri S.S. Rajput and Shri Anant Bajpai, counsel for respondent No.3. ORDER ISt (1SIAugust,2011) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. Appellant/ claimant Basant Kumar Joshi is seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mahasamund (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 01.05.2009, passed in Claim Case No. 174/2008. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.9,00,000/- 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 12.07.2008, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.66,819/- 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 entire evidence led before it held the Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Maruti Swift Car bearing registration No.RJ-14CC/9997, liable to pay compensation to the claimant. -^L-vtiStfSW"^''^' ;\ ".' M.A.C.No.530of2010 '7^' \ 4) As the insurer of the above offending vehicle Maruti Swift Car has not filed any appeal challenging the above finding recorded by the Tribunal, the same now has 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 spent on treatment, awarded Rs.51,819/- towards medical expenses; Rs.10,000/- towards pain and suffering; and Rs.5,000/- towards loss of income during the period oftreatment. The Tribunal, thus, awarded a total sum of Rs.66,819/- as compensation to the claimant for the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.66,819/- @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri Shivendu Pandya, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not awarding any sum towards special diet, attendant, and conveyance; in awarding only Rs.5,000/- towards loss of income during the period of treatment; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.66,819/- only. 7) • Shri S.S. Rajput and Shri Anant Bajpai, learned counsel for respondent No.3, the Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Maruti Swift Car, on the other hand, supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.66.819/- awarded by the Tribunal cannot be < — ^-.-<.'.' M.A.C.No.530of2010 "z^-fc termed as inadequate so as to warrant enhancement in this appeal. 8) Claimant Basant Kumar Joshi was aged about 37 years on the date of the accident. He was a labour by occupation. The claimant sustained fractures of his femur bone is established from the evidence available on record. It is a matter of common knowledge that substantial arftount is required to be spent on the treatment of fractures. The claimant, being a labour, on account of the fracture of his femur bone, could not have peri'ormed his duties as labour for a period of 3 - 4 months, resulting in monitory loss to him. The Tribunal has certainly erred in not awarding any sum towards special diet, attendant, and conveyance; and in awarding only Rs.5,000/- towards loss of income during the period of treatment. 9) The compensation of Rs.66,819/- awarded by the Tribunal when examined in the context of the above mentioned broad features of the case, in our opinion, is somewhat on the lower side and deserves to be enhanced to some extent. 10) Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, we are of the opinion that further award of Rs.10,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation would make the compensation of Rs.66,819/- awarded by the Tribunal as just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstancesof the present case. 11) The appeal filed by the appellanV claimant for enhancement of the compensatian is allowed in part. The ^yv^^ • '.'^- M.A.C.No.530of2010 ^7 claimant is awarded further sum of Rs.10,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation in addition to the sum of Rs.66,819/- awarded by the Tribunal. 12) Respondent No.3 the Bajaj Allianz. General Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the totalsum ofRs.10,000/- before the concerning .Claims Tribunal. 13) No order as to costs. Sd/- Chief Justice subbu Sd/- R.N.Chandrakar Judge y^.--.. s^^^S?^^^^