%» 3 COI A' HON'BL n^?r^ ^i»£: ,1AR J, Smt Usha Singh; VV/'o Late Gajendra iahadur Singh, Aged about 3S years R/o Jaistambh Road, Near Hanuman. Mandir, Rajnandyaon ResDondenti Ramesh Kumar, S,/o Danllal Shrivastava, Aged 39 years, R/o Ward No.29, Sonarpara, Near Shltla Mandir, Rajnandgaon (CG) Presently Residing at Old Aamapara, r^r^ h fl^'—.——. ^i^-u.^r r^-,.. r's i'vionan Nayar, uurg ^L>L») Ov/ner & Driver / NA-1 The New India Insurance Company Limited, through its Branch Manager, Branch Office, Kamthi Line, Rajnandgaon (CG) insurer /' NA-2 rf^T" :<J 11 Ml f-'.iif^.S g" Present: Stir'. Malay Kumar Bhaduri, counset for the appeilant. None for respondent No.1. Shri Sudhir A.qrawa! and Shri P. Dutta, counse! for respondent No.2. S,F^i°'8i..^l '^ys 1 °f llllUBru^.^-ijtiSmij ^jisf'"1^^ ^-y The foliowlng orc of the Court was oasse Si-sa,:£3s> ^=?=? A.ppellant - Smt. Usha Sinah is seekina enhancement of the compensatlon awarded by the First Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rajn.andgaon (for short 'the Tribuna!') vide award datecl 03.11.2004, passec) in Cialrn Case No.100/2003. 2) As agalnst the compensation of Rs.2,90,000;'- claimed by the appe!!ant/claimant by filing a claim petition undsr Section 1 56 of th.e Motor Vehicies Act for t'ne injuries sustalned by her in the motor' accident on 05.06.2003, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.19,714/- as compensation alona v/lth interest @) 6% per annum from the date of -fllina of the claim petitlon tili the date of actual c.avment. 3) S'nri Maiay Kurnar Bhaduri, tearned counsei for the appellant vehementiy argued that the Tribunal has erred in awarding !cw compensatlon of Rs.19,714/- only though the appellant/ claimant sustained serious injuries in the motor accident resultin.q in sermanent disability to the extent of 40%. 4) Shri Sudhir Agrawal and Shri P. Dutta, ieamed counsel for ' resoonden.t No.2 the New India Insurance ComDanv Limlted, on the other hand, supsorted the' award and contended that the . •Domoensatlon of Rs. 19.714/- awarded bv the Tribuna! is just and Drooer c.omDensation 'n the facts and circumstances of the oresent uasti. <.^^ ^ ,-^K-'i 5) !n a motor accident claim case, what is important is that the compensatlon to be awarded by the Courts/Tribunals should be just and proper compensation in the facts snd circumstances of the case. It shouid neither be a meaaer amount of comDensation, nor a Bonanza. 6) Now we shaii examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.19,714/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of'the present case. 7) Claimant Smt. Usha Siriflh on the date of e accident was aged about 38 years. Admittediy, she did not sustain any fracture in the motor accident. The ciaimant had no income of her own at the time of the acc'dent. The biils and vouchers produced by the ciaimant before tne Tribunal in regard to the medicai expenses were to the extent of Rs.7,714/- on!y and the Tribunal has awarded the entire amount of Rs.7,714/-towards medical expenses. 8) The compensation of Rs.19,714/- awarded by the Tribunal when examined in the context of the number and nature of th< iniuries found to have been sustained bv the c-1aimant in the motor accident and the arnount proved to have been spent on treatment; and the above-mentioned broad features of the case, we are satisfied, is just and proper compensation in the facts and cireumstances OT the present case. 9V We. therefore. do not find anv scoDe for enhancement of the comDensation awarded bv the Trlbuna!. SiSK®. •w^'-" ^' ,',..-^" 10) T'ne appeal filed by the appellant'' claimant for enhanc.ement of the compensation, therefore, is liable to be dismissed and is herebv dlsmissed. 11'i No order as to costs. —-_-..-—-.__-—...—.-*-- SUDOU Sd/- Chief Jusdce Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge •^t:^-