CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR IVISION BENCH HON’E SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON’BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J. Misc. Appeal (C) No. 1504 of 2009 Mahendra Kumar Yadav, s/o Shri Domanlal Yadav aged about 25 years, r/0 village Machond, thana Gunderdehi, tahsil Gunderdehi, district Durg C.G. (Claimant) VERSUS Shri Shekh Amln s/o Shri Shekh Latif, r/o Gunderdehl, Thana Gunderdehl, tahsil Gunderdehi, district Durg C.G. (Owner) 2 The United India lnsurance Company Limited, through Divisional Manage, First Floor, Krishna Complex, Kutchery Chowk, tahsil & district Raipur C.G. (lnsurer) Memo of appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act 1 Present: Shri S.S. Rajput, counsel for the appellant. Shrl Sanjay S. Agrawal, counsel for respondent No.2. ORDER (29m September, 201 1) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. HIGH COURT OF D CORAM: BL Appellant Respondents M.A.C‘ No. 1504 of 2009 Appellant/ claimant Mahendra Kumar Yadav is seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the 8m Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Durg (for short ‘the Tribunal’) vide award dated 28.07.2009, passed in Claim Case No.129/2007. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.10,80,000/— 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 21.02.2007, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.97,205/— as compensation to the claimant along with interest @ 6% per annum from 16.09.2008 till the date of actual payment. 3) The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held the United lndia insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Maruti Van bearing registration No.C.G.O7/ZD—7064, liable to pay compensation to the claimant. 4) As the insurer of the above offending vehicle Maruti Van has not tiled any appeal against the impugned award 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 been spent on treatment, awarded Rs.45,000/- towards loss of futt’re earning capacity on account of the permanent disability; Rs.26,204l— towards medical expenses; Rs.9,000/— towards loss of income A \ Wit“ i‘ W i "W 3 / 7 <\ (f M.A.C, No‘ 1504 of 2009 during the period of treatment; Rs.5,000/— for pain and suffering; Rs.4,500/- for special diet; Rs.4,500/— for attendant; and Rs.3,000/— for conveyance. The Tribunal, thus, assessed the compensation payable to the claimant at Rs.97,204/—, which was rounded off to Rs.97,205/—. The Tribunal, thus, awarded a totai sum of Rs.97,205/~ 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.97,205/- @ 6% per annum from 16.09.2008 till the date of aotual payment. 6) Shri S.S. Rajput, iearned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal has erred in awarding low sum of Rs.4,500/—, Rs.4,500/— and Rs.3,000/— towards special diet; attendant; and conveyance though the appellant/ claimant remained under treatment for about three months; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.97,205/- only. 7) Shri Sanjay S. Agrawal, learned counsel for respondent No.2 the United India insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Maruti Van, on the other hand, supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.97,205/— awarded by the Tribunal cannot be termed as inadequate so as to warrant enhancement in this appeal. 8) Claimant Mahendra Kumar Yadav was aged about 25 years on the date of the accident. He was running a Kirana Shop in a village in the district of Durg. The claimant sustained multiple serious injuries including fractures in the motor accident is borne 4 M.A.C. No. 1504 of 2009 (,ZW g2; out from the evidence available on record. It is a matter of common knowledge that substantial amount is required to be spent on the treatment of fractures. The claimant on account of the fractures sustained by him in the motor accident could not have attended his Kirana Shop for a period of about 3 months, resulting in monetary loss to him. 9) The Tribunal certainly has erred in awarding low sum of Rs.3,000/—; Rs.4,500/— and Rs.4,500/— towards conveyance; special diet; and attendant considering that the appellant/ claimant remained under treatment for a period of about three months. 10) The compensation of Rs.97,205/— 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 side and deserves to be enhanced to some extent. 11) Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, we are of the opinion that further award of Rs.11,000/— inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation would make the compensation of Rs.97,205/- awarded by the Tribunal as just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 12) The appeal filed by the appellant/ claimant for enhancement of the compensation, therefore, is allowed in part. The claimant is awarded further sum of Rs.11,000/— inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation in addition to the sum of Rs.97,205/— awarded by the Tribunal. ,.f,#/ , /-\ y “Wm! subbu 5 M.A.c. No. 1504 of 2009 \ 13) Respondent No.2 the United India Insurance Company Limited is granted three months’ time for depositing the total sum of Rs.1 1 ,OOOI- before the concerning Claims Tribunal. order as to costs. Sd/- y Sd/- Rangnath Chandrakar Chief Justice Judge