HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Misc. Appeal (C) No. 1189 of2008 APPELLANT Parmeshwar Yadav Versus RESPONDENTS Harish Bhojwani and others AWARD For consideration Li -11-2011 Sd/- Hon'bte Shri Justice Rajeev Gupta -S-JS^ - 3 <^^v< Sd/- Chief Justice Post for pronouncement ofAward: ^ -11-2011 Sd/- N.K. Agrawal Judge HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MISC. APPEAL fC) No. 1 189 of 2008 APPELLANT RESPONDENTS Parmeshwar Yadav, S/o Madhu Lal Yadav, Aged about 19 years, R/o Marathapara Ward, Dhamtari, Tahsil and District Dhamtari (C.G.) Versus 1. Harish Bhojwani, S/o Jani Ram Bhojwani, Aged about 45 years, R/o Sadar Bazar, Ramani Biscuit Agency, Near Gol Bazar, Dhamtari, District Dhamtari (C.G.) 2. Kishan Lal Bhojwani, S/o Unknown, R/o Gol Bazar, Dhamtari, Tahsil 8s District Dhamtari (C.G.) 3. The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Behind Amar Talkies, Dhamtari, Tahsil and District Dhamtari (C.G.) APj'EALUNDER^SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT,1988 Corani: Hon. Shri Rajeev Gupta, C.J. 8s Hon. Shri N.K. Agarwal, J PRESENT: Shri C.K.Sahu, counsel for the appeUant. Shri A.K.Athaley, counsel for respondent No.3. AWARD (Delivered on ^ -11-2011) Per^.K. Agarwal, J. This is claimant's appeal for enhancement of compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Clauns ^^a.*, -^- 9s 'i Tribunal, Dhamtari (for short 'the Tribunal') in claim case No. 91/2007 vide its award dated 25th March, 2008. 2. As against compensation of Rs.10,82,000/- claimed by the appellant/claimant by filing claim application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (henceforth 'the Act') for fhe injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 22.03.2007, the Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.46,625/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of application till its actual payment. 3. The Tribunal, on a close scrutiny of the evidence led, held: respondent No.l i.e. driver ofActiva motor cycle bearing registration No.C.G. 05-C/6380 and cyclist/appellant equally contributed to the cause of accident; appellant sustained multiple injuries in the said accident; respondent/the Oriental Insurance Company liable for paynient of compensation as it could not establish violation of policy conditions; assessed the amount of compensation as Rs.93,250/-; deducted 50% of it towards contributory negligence of the appellant; and awarded Rs.46,625/- along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of application till its actual amounts to the claimant. 4. Shri C.K. Sahu, leamed counsel appearing for the appellant, while not disputing the amount of compensation of Rs.93,250/- assessed by the Tribunal, would submit: the Tribunal has grossly erred in recording the finding of contributory negligence of the appellant to the extent of 50% and thereby has fallen in error in awarding Rs.46,625/- only as compensation after reducing 50% of compensation towards contributory negligence of the appellant. 5. On fhe other hand, Shri A.K.Athaley, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3 - Oriental Insurance Company supported the impugned award and submitted: in the facts and circumstances of the present case, the finding of contributory negligence of the appellant recorded by the Tribunal is based on proper appreciation of the evidence recorded in the case which does not call for any interference. 6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record of the Tribunal including the award impugned. 7. The factum of accident has been admitted by the owner and driver of the offending vehicle i.e. Activa motorcycle. As per F.I.R. (Ex.P.2), Crime Details Form (Ex.P.3) and final report (Ex.P.l), the accident had occurred due to rash and negligent driving by respondent No.l - Harish Bhojwani i.e. driver ofActiva motorcycle. There is nothing in the statement of the appellant - Parmeshwar Yadav suggesting his (-" ..s^%.' s—y negligence/contributory negligence. Respondents No.l and 2 i.e. Driver and Owner of Activa motorcycle did not enter into witness box. 8. The finding of contributory negligence of the appellant recorded by the Tribunal on fhe face appears to be based on no evidence. 9. When the matter is examined in the context of above broad features of the case, in our considered opinion, the Tribunal has certainly erred in holding appellant guilty of contributory negligence and the above finding is not sustainable in law. 10. For the reasons mentioned hereinabove, the appeal is aUowed in part. The finding of contributory negligence of the appellant recorded by the Tribunal is set aside. The appellant is entitled for the entire amount of compensation of Rs.93,250/- as compensation in place of Rs.46,625/- awarded by the Tribunal. 11. The enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.46,625/- shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of claini application till its actual payment. The award is modified to the above extent. Rest of the conditions of the award shall remain intact. 12. Respondent No.S/Oriental Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time to deposit the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.46,625/- along with interest @ 6% per anniun before the concerned Clairas Tribunal. 13. No order as to costs. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- N.K. Agrawal Judge