HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON’BLE SHRI‘RAJEEV GUPTA, CJ. HON’BLE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINHA, J. Misc. Appeal No. 1161 of 2005 MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT Present: Shri Prafull Bharat and Shri Keshav Dewangan, i (counsel for the appellant. I Shri Shreekumar Agrawal, Senior Counsel with ‘ Shri Anand Gupta, counsel for respondent No.3. I I ORDER- (31‘S‘t March. 2011 ) Ghanshyam Hasani, S/o Awadhram 'Hasani, Aged about 38 years, R/o Nayapara, Rajim At present Patraguda, Jagdalpur, . distt Bastar (CG) VERSUS Respondents 1. Dhumer Soni, S/o Thunku Soni, R/o (Nqn-applicants) Near Marwadi Kabristhan, Tikrapara, Raipur. Distt Raipur (CG) 2. Smt Sindhu Shukla W/o Suryakant Shukla, Deepak Apartment Budapara, Raipur, Distt Raipur (CG) 3. The-National Insurance Company Ltd., Branch Office, Jagdalpur, Dist I Bastar(CG) ‘ vi « ‘The following order of the Coun was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. Appellant/ Claimant Ghanshyam Hasani is seeking enHaincement of the compensation awarded by the 4th Additional Moto Accident Claims Tribunal}, Bastar at Jagdalpur (for short ‘tt1e Tribu‘nal’) vide award dated 17.06.2005, passed in claim case No.9$/2004. 2) i ks against the compensation of Rs.3,50,000/— claimed by the appeilant/ claimant by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Apt for the injuries sustained by him in the motor accidlent on 06.07.2003, the Tribunal awarded a total' sum of Rs.80,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from gthe 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 Ghanshyam Hasani sustained multiple serious injuries including fractures in the motor accident on 06.07%.2003; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Minibus bearing registration No.C.G.04-ZA—0171; as the above offending vehicle Minibus, on the date of the accident was insured with the National Insurance Company Limited and the Insurance Company could not establish any breach of th'e‘ policy conditions, the insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimant. 4 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 injur es proved to have been sustained by the claimant in the motor accident and the amount proved to have been spent on treatment, awal*ded Rs.20 000/- towards medical expenses; Rs.9,000/— towa’rds loss of income during the period of treatment Rs 5 000/- for special diet; and Rs.46,000/— towards permanent disability and pain; and suffering: The Tribunal, thus, awarded a total sum of Rs.8_0,000/- as compensation to the claimantfor the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of R;s.80,000/- @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment H?‘ 6) i Shrl Prafull Bharat and Shri Keshav Dewangan learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal has erred in awarding low compensation of Rs.80,000/- only,. though the appellant/claimant sustained two fractures on spinal bone, as a resiUlt whereof the claimant remained bedridden for a period of abo§ut six months and could not pursue his occupation during this perlod resulting in monitory loss to him. i x“ ¢ 7) l Shri Shreekumar Agrawal, learned Senior Counsel with Shri Anand Gupta, learned counsel for respondent No.3 the National Insurance Company Limited, on the other hand supported the l , \‘ l @ awa{d and contended that the compensation of Rs.80,000/— 7 awa‘ded by the Tribu‘nal is just and proper compensation in the, facts and circumstances of the present case. 8) Claimant Ghanshyam Hasani 0n the date of the accident was ‘ aged about 38 years. The-unfortunate accident in which the ciaimant sustained muitipie Injuries Including fractures took place In the year 2003 The claimant sustained fractures of his spinal bone: is efstabiished from the evidence of AW2 DrsSanjay Pandey, who treated the claimant for his injuries. It is a matter of common L e knotivledge that substantial amount is required to be spent On the] treatment of fractures. The claimant on account of the fractures of i . his spinal bone remained bedridden for a period of about six 7 monfths resulting in monitory loss to him. 9) 1 Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter including _ _ the above mentioned broad features of the case we are of the opinion that further award of Rs 20 000/— incluswe of interest , component on the enhanced amount of compensation would make " the icompensation of Rs.80,000/- awarded by the Tribunal as just. > § andi proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the ' " ‘ present case. i 10); The appeal fled by the appellant/ claimant for enhancement of the compensation therefore is allowed in part The claimant is ? awarded further sum of Rs 2b OOOI- incluswe of interest component f r on the enhanced amount ofvcompensationin addition to the sum o Rs.80,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. > > ‘ r £ ed three months’ time for deositng the total sum of grn Rs.20,000/— before the concerning Claims Tribunal. I V Sd/— Sunil Kumar Sn ¢ Sdl- hief usi No order as o costs. t ls?” iha y 11) espondent No.3 the Nationa! Insurance Company Limited is. R a l C Jtice ) pi