:/y ^ •..:./ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DlViSIQN BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. HON'BLE SHRI N.K. AGARWAL, J. Misc Appeal (C). No. 1647 of 2008 Appellant : Johnson, s/o Ram Charan Uraon, aged Ciaimant about 23 years, Caste - Uraon, R/o Subhash Colony, Domanheet Cotliery, Polibe Station - Chirmiri, District - Korea, Manendragarh (CG) VERSUS Respondents ^ 3 4 Satpal Singh, S/o Charan Singh, aged about 26 years, r/o Subhash CoSony, Domanheel, Chirmiri, Tahsil Manendragarh, District Korea (CG) Santosh, s/o Ruksan Singh, aged about 33 years, Driver, R/o Colony Domanheel Cotliery, Police Station Chirmiri, Ditrict - Korea (CG) Smt Sabita Rai, W/o Rajeev Rai, R/o MP Nagar, Korba, district Korba (CG) United India Insurance Company Limited, Korba, District Korba (CG) 1'^ MisceSSaneous Appeal under Section 173 of IVlotor Vehicles Act Present : Shri Sanjeev Banjare, counsel for the appellant. Shri Dashrath Gupta, counsel for respondent No.4. ORDER (15tnSeptember,2011) MACNo.1647 of 2008 J The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. Appeilant/Claimant Johnson is seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Second Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Manendragarh, district Korea (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated-27/08/2008, passed in Claim Case No.78/2007. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.8,00,830/-, ciaimed by the appellant/ciaimant, by filing a claim petition under Section 1 66 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 26.11 .2003, the Tribunal awarded a tota! sum of Rs.1,45,000/- 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 United india Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Truck bearing registration No.CG 12 ZC / 1714 liable to pay the compensation to the claimant. 4) As the insurer of the above offending vehicie Truck has not filed any appeal chailenging the above finding recorded by the Tribunal, the same now has attained finality. 5) The Tribunai 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.86,400/- towards ioss in the future earning capacity; ^ MACNo.1647 of 2008 ^^ V-' Rs.44,533/- for medical expenses; and Rs.14,067/- for special diet, conveyance and attendant. The Tribunal, thus, awarded a total sum Of Rs.1,45,000/- as compensation to the claimant for the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident. The Tribunai further directed payment of interest on the aboveamount of compensation of Rs.1,45.000/-.@ 6% per annum from the date of filing ofthe claim petition till the date ofactual payment. 6) Shri Sanjeev Banjare, learned counse! for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not awarding any sum towards loss of income during the period of treatment and pain and suffering; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.1,45,000/- only. 7) Shri Dashrath Gupta, learned counsel for respondent No.4 the United tndia Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Truck on the other hand supported the awarded and contended that the compensation of Rs.1,45,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 8) Claimant Johnson was found to be aged about 18-20 years by the Tribunal on the date of the accident. He was working as cleaner/Khalasi in the said Truck. The claimant sustained multiple serious injuries including fracture of his left hand is borne out from the evidence available on record. It is a matter of common knowledge that substantiat amount is required to be spent on the treatment of fractures. The claimant, being a cleaner/Khaiasi In the Truck, could not have performed his duties on account of the i^?^^ ^:K^ MACNo.1647 of 2008 fracture of his left hand for a period of 2-3 months resulting in monitory loss tohim. 9) The Tribunal certainly has erred in not awarding any sum towards loss of income during the period of treatmentand pain and suffering. 10) The compensation of Rs.1,45,000/- awarded by the Tribunal, when examined in the context of the above mentioned broad features ofthe case, in our opinion,is somewhat on the lower side and deserves to be enhanced to some extent. 11) Considering ali the relevant aspects of the matter, we are of the opinion that further award of Rs.15,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation would make the compensation of Rs.1,45,000/- awarded by the Tribunal as just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 12) The appeal filed by the appeilant/claimant for enhancement of the compensation, therefore, is allowed in part. The ciaimant is awarded further sum of Rs.15,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation in addition to the sum of Rs.1,45,000/- awarded by the Tribunai. 13) Respondent No.4 the United India insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.15,000/- before the conceming Claims Tribunai. 14) No order as to costs. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- N. K. Agarwal Judge ^^