1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Misc. Appeal No.101 of 2016 ------ Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd., having its registered office situated at 4th floor, Chintamani Avenue, Off Western Express Highway, Near Virwani Industrial Estate, Goregaon (East), P.O. & P.S. Goregaon, Mumbai-400063 through its Zonal Legal Manager, Sri Jitendra Kumar Pandit, having its office situated at 38B, J.L. Nehri Road, Himalya House, 8th Floor, P.O. & P.S. Tollyganj, Kolkata 700071 .... .... …. Appellant Versus 1. Riya Kumari @ Riya Purbey daughter of Sri Virendra Purbey, resident of Boxi Bandh Road, Dumka, P.O. & P.S. Dumka, District Dumka 2. Sanjay Kumar Sharma, son of Ramesh Pd. Sharma, resident of Sarai Road, P.O. & P.S. Dumka Town, District Dumka (Jharkhand) (owner of vehicle) 3. Durga Mirdha son of Amin Mirdha, rsss Chaupuria, P.O. & P.S. Bindapathar, District Jamtara (Jharkhand) (driver of vehicle) .... .... .... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY For the Appellants : Mr. Swati Shalini, Advocate Mr. Sankalp Goswami, Advocate For the Respondent Nos.2&3 : Mr. Ayush Kumar Verma, Advocate ------ Order No.09 / Dated : 05.03.2025 Insurance Company is in appeal against the award of compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act in M.A.C.C. Case No.65 of 2008 for a sum of Rs.4,66,949/- with interest @ 6% from the date of filing of claim application within 60 days from the order and in the event of default in payment, further penal interest of 9% per annum to be paid. 2. As per the case of the claimant, on 04.08.2008, she suffered motor vehicle accident involving one Pagal Baba Bus No.JH 04C 2689 caused serious head injury and she was taken to Sadar Hospital, Dumka for treatment and thereafter, referred to Chittranjan Advanced Medical Referral Institute, Burdhwan. She was admitted on 04.08.2008 and released on 17.08.2008. 3. The learned Tribunal awarded Rs.4,66,949/- under the following heads: - 1 Pain and suffering already undergone and to be suffered in future, mental and physical shock, hardship, inconvenience and discomforts etc. and loss of amenities in life on account of permanent disability. Rs.3,00,000/- 2 2 Discomforts, inconvenience and loos earnings of the parents during the period of hospitalization Rs.25,000/- 3 Medical and individual expenses during the period of hospitalization Rs.94,798.69 + 7150 + 15,000 = Rs.1,16,948.69 4 Future medical expenses for correction of the mal union of fracture and incidental expenses for such treatment. Rs.25,000/- 5 Total Rs.4,66,948.69 round figure Rs.4,66,949 4. The facts of the case are not much in dispute and the challenge to the award is mainly on the ground that the claimant had suffered 10% of disablement as per the permanent disability certificate marked as Exhibit X/11 for identification. 5. It is argued that the injury sustained cannot be said to be the cause of permanent disability as in the certificate, no observation has been made with regard to its condition either progressive likely to improve or not likely to improve etc., the said column has been left blank. It is further argued that instead of assessing loss of earning on the basis of notional income, lumpsum compensation amount of Rs.3,00,000/- has been awarded under pain and suffering. Further, Rs.1,16,948.69 under the head of medical and individual expenses during the period of hospitalization. It is pointed out that medical bill for a sum of Rs.67,400/- was filed, but the award has been made for Rs.94,798.69 and further in the list of exhibits, no medical bill has been referred to. 6. Notices were earlier issued to the claimant, but none has appeared and consequently, the appeal is being heard ex-parte. 7. It is not in dispute that the claimant was aged 14 years at the time of accident. It has been come in evidence that she had to undergo surgery after being admitted in Chittaranjan Advanced Medical Referral Institute, Burdwan where she was admitted on 04.08.2008 and discharged on 17.08.2008 as per the medical bills adduced into evidence on behalf of the claimant. 8. Charges include operation theater charge as well as surgery charge which substantiates the case of the claimant regarding the injury suffered 3 followed by surgery. In view of the fact that no pecuniary loss was suffered, therefore, the Tribunal has not awarded any compensation under this head. However, considering the nature of injury and the period for which the claimant was admitted in the hospital, compensation of Rs. 3,00,000/- cannot be said to be excessive. I do not find any infirmity in the award. Miscellaneous Appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. Pending I.A., if any, stands disposed of. The statutory amount, which was deposited before this Court at the time of filing of this appeal, shall be remitted to the Tribunal for disbursement to the claimant, which will be adjusted against the compensation amount. (Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.) Anit