(S) HIGH COURTOF CHMAmSGARH AT BILA8PUR jMVIStONBENCH GORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV ©UPTA,GJ. HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J Appellant Misc Appeal (Ct No. 1811 ot 2^09 Anita Baghmare, d/o Janrao Baghmare, aged about 18 years, r/o in front of MTT Center Truebater Set Dallirajhara, PS Dalllrajhara, District Durg (CG) Resoondents VERSUS 1 Sandeep Jibhkate s/o Sahadeo Jibhkate Occupation : Driver, R/o Bhitewada, Tahsil Bhandara, Distt Bhandara (Maharashtra) Pin Code 441904 (Driver of Truck No.MH - 36/1645) 2 Yuvraj Parasram G Bhandarkar, r/o -' Amtalab Road, Deshbandhu Warcl Bhandra, Tahsil & Distrtot Bhandara (Maharashtra) Pin Code: 441904 3 The Manager, ICIGI Lombard Motor Insurance Company Jenith House Keshawao, Aade Marg Mahalaxml, Mumbal, 400034 Miscellaneou^ Appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act Present : Shri NK Chatterjee and Shri BP Slngh, counset forthe - appellant. Shri Saurabh Sharma and Shri Aditya Sharma.counsel for respondent No.3. ORDER (10th October, 2011) MACNo.1511<rf20C® @ The following order of the Coyrt was pg®sed by Rajeev Gupta, CJ. This is claimant's appeal for enhancemert of the compensation awarded by the Additional Motor Accident Glaims Tribunal, Balod, djstrict Durg (for short 'the Tribunal') vide ^ward dated 30.07.2009, passed in Claim Case No.64/2009. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.25,00,000/-, claimed by the appellant/claimant, by filing a claim petition under 8®<^iont®© of the Motor Vehictes Act, for the injuries sustained by her in the motor accident on 19.10.2007, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,57,971/- as compensation along with fnterest @ 6% per annum from the date of flling of the claim petition till the date of actualpayment. 3) The Tribunal on a close scrutlny of the entire evidenee led before it held the ICICI Lombard Motor Insurance Company l..imited, the insurer of the offending vehlcle Truck beartng registration No.MH 36/1645 liable to pay the compensation t©the claimant. 4) As the insuFer ofthe above offending vehtele Truck has not filed any appeal againstthe impugned award chaltenging ttwab©ve flndlng recorded by the Trtbunal, the same now has altalned finajity. 5) : The Tribunal considering the number and nature of the injuries proved to have been sustained by the Glajmant In the motor accident and the amount proved to have been spent on treatment, "^^s^ MACNo.1511of2009 /^v^o awarded Rs.77,471/- towards medteal expenses; Rs.50,000/- towards pain and suffering and permanent disability; Rs.17,500/- for conveyance; Rs.6,000/- for loss of income during the period of treatment; Rs.4,000/- for special diet; and Rs.3,000/- for attendant. The Tribunal, thus, awarded a total sum of Rs.1,57,971/- as compensation to the claimant for the injuries sustained by her in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.1,57,971/" 6% per annum from the date of fillng of the clalm petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri NK Chatterjee and Shri BP Sln@h, teamed eoun^ for the appellant submitted that the Tribunat has erredto awardlng low eompensatlorTofRs.1,57,9717- onty, though the appetlarrt/ctaimant sustained multiple sertous Injuries including fractures h the motor acddent. 7) Shri Saurabh Sharma and Shrl Aditya Sharma, learned counsel for respondent No.3 the ICICI Lombard Motor Insurance Company Limited, the insurer ofthe offending vehicte Truek on the other hand supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.1.57,971/- awarded by the Tribunal eannot be termed as inadequate so as to warrant enhancement in this appeal. 8) Claimant Anita Baghmare was aged about 18 years on the date of the accident. She was a student of 10th standard and admtttedly was not having any independent income of her own. The claimant sustained multiple serious injuries jncluding fractures of serious nature in the motor accident is borne out frorw the ^ ^.^^^ ,:r:,-^. s ^ '!^SsS^-"| | i^J/ '^3^^^•^ 4 MACNo.1S11of2009 (^) evidence available on record. It (s a matter of cemmon knowtedge ^ that substantial amount is required to be spent on the treatment of fractures. 9) The compensation of Rs.1,57,971/- awarded by the Tribunal, when examined in the context of the above mentioned broad features of the case, In our opinion, is certainly on the lower slde and deserves to be enhanced to some extent. 10) Considering all the relevant aspects of the rnatter, we are oft the opinion that further award of Rs.25,00€y* inclustve of interesit component on the enhanced amount of compensation would make the compensation of Rs.1,57,971/- awarded by the Tribunal as |ust and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 11) The appealfiled by the appellant/ctaimant for enhancement ofthe compensation, therefore, is altowed in part. The ctaimartt i® awarded'further sum of Rs.25,000/- inclusive of interest Gompenent on the enhanced amount of compensation in addttion tothe sum of Rs.1,57,971/-awarded bythe Tribunal. 12) Respondent No.3 the ICICt Lombard Motor Insurance Company is granted three months' tlme for depositlng the totat sum of ks.25,000/- before the conceming Claims Tribunal; 13) No order as to costs. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge tma