HiGH COURT OF CHHARTTISGARH AT BILASPUR Single Bench:- Hon'ble Shri R.N. Chandrakar. J Appeliant (Claimant) Respondents (Non-applicants) IVI.A. (0 No. 696 of2007 Tulas Ram Dhru, S/o Chandan Singh Dhru, aged about 35 years. By caste - Gound, By Profession-Mason-Rajmistri- Cultivator, R/o Village Banpachari, P.S. - Tumgaon, Tahsil Mahasamund, District : Mahasamund (C.G.) Versus 1. Venu Dhan Patei, S/o Tilak Ram Patei, R/o Village Gongai, P.S. Tumgaon, District Mahasamund (Driver of Tractor & its Trolley NO.C.G.10/A/1I279&1280) 2. Nandu Ram Lashkar, S/o Budhuram Lashkar, R/o Village - Hindadhih, Post - Gudi, District Biiaspur(C.G.) (Owrier of Tractor & its Trolley NO.C.G.10/A/1279&1280) 3.' The Oriental Insurance Com. Ltd. Division Office at Madina Building, Jai! Road, Raipur bistt. Raipur (C.G.) (insurer Com. of Tractor & its Trolley No. C.G. 10/A/1279 & 1280) MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL UNDER SECT!ON 173 OF THE IVIOTOR VEHICLESACT. •v- ADpearance; Shri JiA. Lohani, counsel for the appeiiant Shri Shailendra Sharma, counsel for respondent No.3. -\- Oral Order (Passed on 20th June, 201 1) ^- • Heard. 1) Appellant Tulas Ram Dhru is seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the First Additional Motor Accident CIaims Tribunal, Mahasamund (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 25.11.2006, passed in Claim Case No. 44/2006. 2) As against the compensation of Rs. 3,95,000/-, daimed by the appellanVdaimant, by filing a daim petition under Section 166 ofthe Motor Vehicle Act, for the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 10.05.2005, the Tribunal awarded total sum of Rs. 17,000/- as compensation to the claimant along with interest @ 6% per annum. 3) The Tribunal on a close scrutiny ofthe entire evidence led before it held that claimant Tulas Ram sustained multiple serious injuries including tocture in themotoracddenton 10.05.2005, resulted in permanent disabiiity to the extent of 45%; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the offendjng vehicle Tractor & Its Trolley bearing registration No. No. C.G.-10/A-1279 & C.G.-10/A-1280, cespectively, as the above offending vehicle Tractor TroSiey on the date of the accident was insured with the Oriental lnsurancek Company Limited and the InsuranceCompany could not estabiish any breach of the policy conditions, the tnsurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimant. 4) As the respondents have not filed any appeal against the award, the above findings recorded by the Tribunal have now attained finality. 5} TheTribungii^onsideringthenumberandnatureoftheinjuriesproved .'< to have bee^i, sustained by the claimant in the motor accident and the ~ resultant seriou*? irijuries and fracture on the right legand the amount proved to have been spent on the treatment, awarded Rs.12,000/a- towards loss of future earning capadty, physical pain and mental suffering and Rs.5,000/- towards medical expenses. The Tribunal, thus, awarded a total sum of Rs. 17.000/- ascompensation to the claimant for the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident. 6) Shri J.A.Lohani, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Tribunal has erred inawarding low compensation of Rs. 17,000/- only, though the appellant/claimant sustained muitiple serious injuries including fractures in the motor accident, resulting in permanent disabiiity to the extent of 45%. 7) Per contra, Shri Shailendra Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent No.3 - the Oriental Insurance Company Limited supported the award and contended that the compensaUon ,of Rs.17,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 8) In a motor acddent claim case what is important is that, the compensation to be awarded by the Courts/Tribunals should be just ! • and proper compensation in the fact and circumstances of the case. It - shouid neither be a meager amount ofcompensation, nor a bpnanza. 9) Claimant Tuias Ram on the date of the accident was aged about 35 years. He pleaded that he used to earn Rs.100/- per day as labour and further income of Rs. 25,000/- per annum by doing agricultural work. The evidence of AW3 Dr. G.L. Chandrakar establishes that the claimant sustained fracture of his right leg which resulted in permanent disability to the extent of 45%. it is a matter of common knowledge that subst^ntial amount is required to be spent on the treatment of '< fractures.",\ 1Q) The compertsation of Rs.17,000/- awarded by the Tribunal when examined in the context pf the above mentioned broad features of the .^E^%^ ^'.^^^ ^ il y,.i'^ ^^ Vijay 4 case, in my opinion, is certainly on the lower side which deserves to be enhanced suitably. 11) Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, l am of the opinion that further award of Rs. 10,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation would make the compensation of Rs.17,000/- awarded by the Tribunalas just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 12) The appeal filed by the appellanVciaimant for enhancement of the compensation, therefore, is aliowed in part. The ciaimant is awarded further sumof Rs. 10,000/- inclusive of interest componenton the enhanced amount of compensation in addition to the sum of Rs. 17,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. 13) Respondent No.3 the Oriental Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs. 10,000/- before the concerning Claims Tribunai. 14) No orders as to costs. Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge \l-'< i\