HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Misc. Appeal (Q No. 342 of 2007 Appellant Respondents Sint. Reyaniati VBHSUS Deepak Kuinar Pandey & others ORDBR For consideration -2 ") -06-20 11 7y^- Sd/- ^<7 -06-2011 Hon'ble Shri Raieev Gupta J- ^^T^€-:_l Sd/- Chief Justice Postfor:A6 -06-2011 Sd/- N.K. Agarwal Judge ^.^es-~^\. i ^'%,.. <£) HIGH COURT OP CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Misc. Appeal (Q No. 342 of 2007 Appellattt : Smt Reyamati W/o Shri Prasadi aged about 43 years R/o Bazar Para Negaiiar PS Darbha Distt. Bastar (CG). VERSUS Respondeats : 1, Deepak Kumar Paudey S/o Abhay Kumar Pandey aged about 23 years R/o VUlage Kukanar PS Kukanar Distt. Dantevada (CG) (Driver of fhe vehicle) 2. Domu S/o Sardu R/o ViUage Guma PO Kodari Pal Tali. Konta Distt. Dantevada (CG). 3, Oriental Insuraace Compaiiy Limited, Jagdalpur, Distt. Bastar (Misc. Appeal under Section 173 offhe Motor Vehicles Act) DB: Hoa^ble Shri Rajeev Gupta, C.J. & Hon»bleShri N. K. Assu-wal. J. Present : Shri PK Tulsyaa, Advocate for ihe appellant, Shn ShaUendra Sharma, Advocate for respondent No. 3/ Insuraace Coiapaiiy. JUDGMBNT (DeHvered on2^-.06.2011) Per : N.K. Agarwal, J. 1. Instant appeal has been preferred by the appellatit seeking enhaacement of conipensation in fhe award dated 20.12.2006, passed by ftie IVfli Addl. Motor Accident Claiias Tribunal (FTC), Bastar, Jagdalpur (for short <the Tribunal") in claiin case No. 06/06. 2. Brieffacts ofthe case are that: on 14,05.2005/due to rash and negligent driviag of driver of Tractor bearing registration No. CG-18-0-0328 & its Trolley No. CG-18-0-0329, the said Tractor tumed turtle as a result ofwhich ffae appellaiit who was sitting ui tlie toroUey sustamed xnultiple injuries. ...?^.. ^•^•'•s»^^ '% ^s^^ / '-7-- . ......';.',A'-' rs2_ 3. As agaiast fhe compensation of Rs. 6,87,000/- claimed by the appeUant/claunaiit by filing a claim petition iinder Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'MV Acf), for the iajuries sustaiaed by her in the niotor accideBt on 14.05.2005; fhe Tribunal has awarded a total siim of Rs. 1,000/- as compensation along with mterest @ 6 percent per anBiim from fhe date of fying of the claim petition tiU the date of actiial paynient. 4. The Tribiinal, on a close scnitmy of the entire evidence led, material placed and submissions made by the parties, held : accident occurred due to rash and Degligent driving ofdriver of offending vehicle; clainiant siiffered simple inJTiries in the accident; awarded Rs. 1,000/- in favoiir ofclaimant payable by the respondents jointly and severally along wath interest @ 6 percent froin fhe date of application till the date of actiial payinent. 5. Shri PK Tulsyan, leamed counsel appeailng for tlte appellant would submit: tlie Tribunal has erred in awardmg low amoiint of compensation of Rs. 1,000/- only, fhoiigh the appellant on account of mjuries siistained by her iii the accident has been rendered unfit to pursiie her occiipation as laboiir and fherefore, award ainoiint deser^es to be suitably enhanced lookiag to fhe facts and circumstances ofthe case, 6. On tlie otlier hand, Shri Shailendra Sharma, leamed coiinsel appearing for the respondent No. 3/Insurance Company \ supported the award impugued and would siibmit : the \ appellaiit with btlier passengers was traveling in the offendmg vehicle as gratuitous passenger aiid insurance company is not ^ :<- ""^.^ ^^.•^: '^ <»?sl'"1 .r El! '^ ^ ll"l l]i l!.lj at all liable for paynient of coinpensation to the claimant inasmuch as, flie risk of the appellant/claimant is neither statutonly required to be covered under tbe policy nor the rasuraace conipany had taken such risk by entering iuto special contract witli the insiired/owner by charging extra premiura fherefor. He would further subniit in the facts and circuinstaaces of the case, the araount awarded by the Tribiznal is jiist aad proper aad needs no iuterfereiice. 7. As fhe respondent No. 3/0riental InsTirajice Company has not challenged its UabiUty by preferring appeal, therefore, tbe finduigs of the Tribunal holdmg the Insurance Company Uahle for payinent of corapensation to the claimant has now attained finaMty. 8. Appellant sustamed simple iiijuries ui the accident; was aged about 43 years on the date of accident, she was a laboiir by occupation; niust have sziffered pain and s^iffering, iixiist have spent at least some aniount on treatment and iniist have suffered loss of earaing for few days on account of simple iajuries sustained by her in fhe said accident. 9. The compensation of Rs, l.OOO/- awarded by the Tribiinal, when examiaed ia fhe light of the above laentioned broad features of flie case, in our opinion, is certainly on the lower side aiid deserves to be enhanced suitably, 10. Considering all the relevant aspects ofthe niatter/ we are ofthe opiaion fliat further award of Rs. 5,000/- inchisive of interest "\ compondnt would niake the conipensation of Rs. 1,000/~ \ awarded by\tiie Tribunal as jiist and proper compensation ia the facts aad Gircumstances ofthe present case, -^ ^;^^^•^••. •l''^:-< (^ 11. The appeal filed by tlie appellant/claiiiiaiit for enhancement of fhe compensation, therefore, is allowed in part. The claiinant is awarded further suia of Rs. 5,000/- inclusive of mterest in addition to fhe suin ofRs. 1,000/-, awarded by the Tribiinal. 12. Respondent No. 3/ Oriental Insurance Companiy Limited is graated three months' time for depositing tbe total suni of Rs. 5,000/- before the conceming Clmms Tribunal. No order as to costs. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- N-K. Agarwal Judge Sahu