HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, CJ. HON'BLE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINHA, J. Appellant Claimant Respondents Misc. Appeal No. 1067 of 2003. Nanakuram Pandey s/o late Videshiram Pandey, aged 34 years, Caste Kumhar (Earth Utensils Maker), village Bhatagaon, P.S. Kurud, Distt. Dhamtari Q.G. VERSUS Ganguram s/o Bisahu Ram Paul, aged 32 years, resident of village Jarwai, P.S. Kurud, Distt. Dhamtari C.G. (DRIVER) Umed Singh s/o Paranu Paul, resident of village Chorbhatti, P.S. Kurud, distt. Dhamtari C.G. (OWNER OF VEHICLE) United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Block Office Krishna Complex, First Floor, Kachahari Chowk, Jail Road, Raipur, distt. Raipur. (INSURER) MEMORANDUIUI OF APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTORVEHICLES ACT Present: Shri Shishir Dixit, counsel for the appellant. Shri Wasim Miya, counsel for respondents No. 1 and 2. Smt. Hamida Siddique, counsel for respondent No.3. ORDER • (26mApril,2011) ^^.;fl.\ £. ....„,,. 1> II &ttES'iB3»- " ';;:-i.'%-^^ The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. Appellant/ Claimant Nanakuram Pandey is seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dhamtari (for shori: 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 13.08.2003, passed in Claim Case No.25/2002. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.5,20,000/- 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 02.06.2002, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,00,0007- 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 that claimant Nanakuram Pandey sustained multiple serious injuries including fracture of his parietal bone in the motor accident on 02.06.2002; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Tractor- Trolley bearing registration Nos.C.G.-05/3672 and C.G.-005/3673, respectively; as the above offending vehicle Tractor-Trolley on the date of the accident was insured with the United India Insurance Company Limited and the Insurance Company could not establish any breach of the policy conditions, the Insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimant. ":!^ :.„: '\ Kla^ s •s'! f" 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 accident and the amount proved to have been spent on treatment, awarded Rs.47,500/- towards medical expenses; Rs.45,000/- towards loss in the future earning capacity on account of the permanent disability to the extent of 30%; Rs.5,000/- towards pain and suffering; and Rs.2,500/- towards conveyance and special diet. The Tribunal, thus, awarded a total sum of Rs.1,00,000/- 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.1,00,000/- @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the ctaim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri Shishir Dixit, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not awarding any sum towards loss of income during the period of treatment and attendant; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.1,00,0007- only. 7) Smt. Hamida Siddique, learned counsel for respondent No.3 the United India Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Tractor-Trolley, on the other hand, suppori:ed the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 8) Shri Wasim Miya, learned counsel for respondents No.1 Ganguram and No.2 Umed Singh, the driver and owner of the offending vehicle Tractor-Trolley, also supported the award. 9) Claimant Nanakuram Pandey was aged about 34-35 years on the date of the accident. He was a labour by occupation. The claimant sustained depressed fracture of his parietal bone in the motor accident is established from the evidence of AW-3 Dr.V.K.Pandey. It has also come on record that the claimant remained admitted in hospital for his treatment for a period of more than one month. 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 fracture of his parietal bone could not have performed his duties as labour for a period of 4-6 months, resulting in monitory loss to him. The Tribunal has certainly fallen into error in not awarding any sum towards lossof income during the period of treatment. 10) The compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- 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 suitably. 11) Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, we are of the opinion that further award of Rs.25,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation would make 'A »9 subbu the compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- awarded by the Tribunal as just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 12) The appeal filed by the appellant/ claimant for enhancement of the compensation, therefore, is allowed in part. The claimant is awarded furi:her sum of Rs.25,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation in addition to the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. 13) Respondent No.3 the United India Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.25,000/- before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 14) No order as to costs. Ouef Justfce Sd/- SuiulKumarSinha Judge ..j.LMil-UA^_-.,