HON’BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, CJ. HON’BLE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINH, J. Misc. Appeal No. 397 of 2005 Appellant Claimant Mohan Lal Jain, aged about 59 years, S Shri Samrath Mal Jain, Merchant residen of Bairen Bazar, aipur. Tahsil & District Raipur R (Chhattisgarh) w l Respondents (Driver) Asish Jain, aged 22 years, s/ Shri C.L. Jain, resident f Shitala Chowk, Kushalpur, Raipur, Tahsil & District Ri h) apur (Chattisgarh 2. United India Insurance C Ltd., ‘1 o. Branch Amar Complex, Jeevan Beema Marg, Simga Road, aipur, Tahsil & Distt. Raipur (Chattisgarh) /s M R (insurer) (Owner) 3. M Jain Automobiles, .G. Road, aipur, Tahsil & Dist. Raipur (Chhattisga) rh Prsent: Shri anjay K. Agrawal, Shri Sourabh Sharma a Sri Aditya Sharma, ounsellor the appellant. None for rpondents o. 1 3. es N & Shri Shree Kumar Agrawal, learned Sen‘ior Counse with Shri P. Dutta, counsel for respondent No.2. ORDER (05m January, 2011) The following order of the Court was passed' by p Rajeev Gupta, C.J. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: A /o t VERSUS o o R h MISC. APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 e S nd h c l Appellant — Mohan La! Jain is seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tenth Additional Motor Accident Ciaims Tribunal, Raipur (for short ‘the Tribunal’) vide award dated 20.12.2004, passed in Claim Case No.64/2004. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.15,30,600/— 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 24.04.1996, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.2,15,000/— as compensation to the claimant with the further stipulatiOn that in the event of the insurer’s failure to pay compensation to the claimant within a period of one month from the passing of the award, the claimant shall be entitled to get interest on the above amount of compensation @ 9% 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 that claimant Mohan Lal Jain sustained multiple serious injuries in the motor accident on 24.04.1996, resulting in permanent disability to the extent of 80%; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Scooter bearing registration No. MP. 23K/9907; as the above offending vehicle Scooter on the date of the accident was insured with the United India Insurance Company Limited and the Insurance Company could not establish any breach aof the policy conditions, the insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimant. / 1'77. @ 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 acoident and the resultant permanent disability to the extent of 80% and the amount proved to have been spent on treatment awarded Rs.80,000/— towards permanent disability; Rs.60,000/- towards medical expenses; Rs.50,000/- towards likely inconvenience, lack of comfOrt, mental tension and other aspects on account of the injuries and permanent disability; Rs.10,000/- towards pain and suffering; and Rs.10,000/— towards special diet. The Tribunal, thus, aWarded a total sum of Rs.2,15,000/— as compensation to the claimant (there appears to be some calculation mistake as the total of the above amounts awarded by the Tribunal under the above heads comes to Rs.2,10,000/— only). The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation @ 9% per annum in the event of the insurer’s failure to pay the amount of compensation to the claimant within one month of the passing of the award. 6) Shri Sanjay K. Agrawal, Shri Sourabh Sharma and Shri Aditya Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal has erred in awarding low compensation of Rs.2,15,000/— only and in directing conditionalpayment of interest in the event of the insurer’s failure to pay the amount of compensation to the ieisn LI. r olaimant within one month of the passing of the award. it was further pointed out that the insurer of the offending vehicle Scooter deposited the amount of compensation before the Tribunal within one month of the passing of the award on 17.01 .2005 and as such, the claimant has been deprived of the amount of interest on the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 7) Shri Shree Kumar Agrawal, learned Senior Counsel for respondent No.2 the United lndia insurance Company Limited, on the other hand, supported the award and contended that the compenSation of Rs.2,15,000/— awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. Bj 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 shouid neither be a meager amount of compensation, nor a Bonanza. 9) Now we shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.2,15,000/— awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of thepresent case. 10) On due consideration of the submissions of learned counsel for the parties; the number and nature of the injuries proved to have been sustained by the ciaimant in the motor accident; the fact that the claimant was an agriculturist; and the. amount proved to have been spent on treatment, we are satisfied that the amount of compénsation awarded by the Tribunal cannot be termed as inadequate so as to warrant any enhancement in this appeal. 11) Nevertheless, the Tribunal has certainly erred in not awarding interest on the amount of compensation to the claimant and in only directing conditional payment of interest in the event of insurer’s failure to pay compensation to the claimant within. one month of the passing of the award. In the present case, as the insurer deposited the amount of compensation before the Tribunal within one month of the passing of the award on 17.01.2005, the claimant certainly has been deprived of the amount of interest which he was entitled to get on the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. t2) Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, including the delay in disposal of the claim petition, and the present appeal and the fact that the Insurance Company alone is not to be blamed for the entire delay in the matter, We are of the considered opinion that award of lumpsum of Rs.20,000/— towards interest on the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal would be just and proper in the preSent case. 13) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellant! claimant for enhancement of the compensation is ailowed in part. The claimant is awarded further sum of Rs.20,000/- towards interest-on the amount of compensation awarded by thgTribunai in addition to the sum of Rs.2,1 5,000/— awarded by the Tribunal. 14) Respondent No.2 the United India insurance Company Limited is granted three months’ time for depositing the total sum of Rs420,000/- before the concerning Claims Tribunal. W vi , i t f l l 15) No order as to costs. \ niN / .Sil/I” Sd/_ Q [‘J;Sunil Kumar Sinha Chief Jush'ce Judge ll r JUdge Jl subbu ‘ '