^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J. Misc. Appeal fC) No. 377 of 2010 Appellants/ Claimants <:. Ramesh Nishad s/o Motilal Nishad aged about 28 years, caste Kewat occupation Agriculture Labourer, r/o village Pendradih, post Sorid Tahsil Mahasamund, distt. Mahasamund C.G. Kumari Lileshwari Nishad d/o Ramesh Nishad aged about 4 years, r/o Pendradih, police station Mahasamund, district Mahasamund C.G. VERSUS Respondents Puna Ram Sinha s/o Purshottam Sinha, aged about 27 years, r/o. Bhalesar, police station Mahasamund, tahsil & district Mahasamund C.G. (Alleged Tractor No.C.G.04-DB/1284 of driver) Jagdish Sinha s/o Anandram Sinha, aged about unknown r/o Bhaleshar, post Kenkera, Tahsil & district Mahasamund C.G. (Alleged Tractor No.C.G.04-DB/1284 of owner) Bajaj Alias General Insurance Company Limited, Shiv Mohan Bhawan, Vidhan Sabha Road Pandari Raipur, district Raipur C.G. (Alleged Tractor No.C.G.04-DB/1284 of Insurer) Misc. Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act ^ M^^.^ t 1 'SSSSi I.i MACNo. 377 of 2010 Present: G.: ('- Shri C.R. Sahu and C.K. Sahu, counsel forthe appellants. Shri S.S. Rajput and Ms. Renu Singh, counsel for respondept No.3. ORDER (27th August, 2011) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. This is claimants' appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mahasamund (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 17.12.2009, passed in Claim Case No. 125/2009. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.8,60,000/- claimed by claimant Kumari Lileshwari, a minor girl aged about 4 years, by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act through her father Ramesh Nishad, for the injuries sustained by her in the motor accideht on 07.05.2009, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.40,680/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filingof 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 Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Tractor bearing registration No.C.G.04-DB/1284, liable to pay compensation to the claimant. ^J^ 1 MACNo. 377 of 2010 4) As the insurer of the above offending vehicle Tractor has not filed any appeal 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 her treatment by her father, awarded Rs.15,000/- towards pain and suffering and loss of future amenities; Rs.15,000/- towards pecuniary loss on account of her admission in the hospital between 08.05.2009 and 20.05.2009 and Rs.10,680/- towards medical expenses. The Tribunal, thus, awarded a total sum of Rs.40,680/- as compensation to the claimant for the injuries sustained by her in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.40,680/- @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri C.R. Sahu and Shri C.K. Sahu, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not awarding any sum towards special diet, attendant, and conveyance; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.40,680/- only. 7) Shri S.S. Rajput and Ms. Renu Singh, learned counsel for respondent No.3, the Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Tractor, on the other hand, supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.40,680/- awarded by the Tribunal cannot be termed as inadequate so as to warrant enhancement in this appeal. MACNo. 377 of2010 8) Claimant Ku. Lileshwari Nishad, was aged about 4 years on the date of the accident. Her father was an agriculturist. The daimant sustained multiple serious injuries including fracture in the motor accident is borne out from the evidence availabie on record. It is a matter of common knowledge that substantial amount is required to be spent on the treatment of fracture. The claimant's father Ramesh Nishad on account of the admission of his daughter in the hospital could not have attended agricultural operations for a period of 2-4 v/eeks resulting in monitory loss to him. The Tribunal certamly has erred in not awarding any sum towards attendant, conveyance and special diet. 9) The compensation of Rs.40,680/- awarded by the Tribunal when examined in the context of the above mentioned broad features of the case, in our opinion, is somewhat on the lower side and deserves to be enhanced to some extent. 10) Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, we are of the opinion that further award of Rs.5,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensatjon wouid make the compensation of Rs.40,680/- awarded by the Tribunal as just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 11) The appeal filed by the appellant/ claimant for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The claimant is awarded further sum of Rs.5,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation in addition to the sum of Rs.40,680/- awarded by the Tribunal. MACNo. 377 of 2010 12) Respondent No.3 the Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.5,000/- before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 13) No orderas to costs. — subbu Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge y.