1 2025:CGHC:36273 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 684 of 2019 1 - Teman Sahu S/o Shatruhan Sahu Aged About 46 Years R/o Village Chote Urla, P.S. Abhanpur, Raipur, Tehsil And Disrtict- Raipur, Chhattisgarh --- Appellant versus 1 - Niyaj Khan S/o Kutubuddeen Aged About 60 Years R/o Cheema Local Carrier, Mahasamund, Tehsil And Disrtict- Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh........... (Driver Of Truck Trailer C.G. 13 L 0905), 2 - M/s Cheema Local Carrier And Constructions Through Managing Director, R/o Near Bus Stand, Mahasamund, Tehsil And District- Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh.........(Owner Of Truck Trailer C.G. 13 L 0905), 3 - United India Insurance Company Ltd. Through Branch Office, Shop No.7 New Mandi Road, Mahasamund Divisional Manager, Divisional Office, Krishna Complex, Kachehri Chowk, Raipur, Tehsil And Disrtict- Raipur, Chhattisgarh..............(Insurer Of Truck Trailer C.G. 13 L. 0905) --- Respondents For Appellant : Mr. Akhilesh Mishra, Advocate For Respondent No.1 and 2: Mr. Divya Nand Patel, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Rishikant Mahobia, Advocate For Respondent No.3 : Mr. Akash Shrivastava, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Ratan Pusty, Advocate BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN Digitally signed by BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN Date: 2025.08.12 11:17:29 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order On Board 25/07/2025 1. Claimant/appellant has filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short ‘the Act of 1988’) seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the learned Fourth Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur, District – Raipur (for short ‘the Claims Tribunal’) vide award dated 17.12.2018 passed in Claim Case No.677/2016 thereby allowing application in part and awarding Rs.58,700/- as compensation in an injury case. 2. Facts relevant for disposal of this appeal are that appellant/claimant filed an application application U/s. 166 of the Act, 1988 seeking total compensation of Rs.23,50,000/- on account of the injury suffered by him in the road accident. It was pleaded that on 17.06.2016 at around 7:00 PM, the appellant was engaged in construction work in an under- construction road, where appropriate information and warning signboards was placed on both sides indicating obstruction. At that time, non-applicant No.1, while driving the offending Truck Trailer bearing registration No. CG-13L-0905 in a rash and negligent manner, dashed the appellant and other labourers working at the site, resulting in a serious accident. The appellant suffered fracture of right knee and also suffered injury in right shoulder. He was immediately taken to the Government Health Center at Bagbahara and subsequently referred to V.Y. Hospital, Raipur, where he remained hospitalized from 17.06.2016 to 24.06.2016. On the date of accident, appellant was engaged as operator of Paver machine and earning Rs.10,000/- per month. On account of motor-accidental injuries, he is now unable to perform his 3 work in the manner as he was doing prior to accident and thus suffered loss of income. Claimant also sought compensation under all other heads as are available to him like medical expenses, special diet, future medical expenses, pain and sufferings etc. 3. Non-applicant Nos.1 & 2/driver and owner of offending vehicle, submitted reply and resisted the claim. It was further pleaded that claim application was filed on false and fabricated grounds exaggerating the amount of compensation. It was pleaded that at the time of accident, non-applicant No.1 was having valid and effective driving license and offending vehicle was insured with non-applicant No.3. 4. Non-applicant No.3-Insurer of offending vehicle filed its reply denying the averments made therein. It was pleaded that on the date of accident, non-applicant No.1 was not having valid and effective driving license to drive the offending vehicle and the offending vehicle was being plied in breach of conditions of insurance policy without any fitness and permit. 5. The learned Claims Tribunal upon appreciation of the pleadings and the evidence brought on record by respective parties, allowed the claim application in part, awarded total compensation of Rs.58,700/- and fastened liability upon non-applicant No.3/Insurance Company to satisfy the amount of compensation. 6. Learned counsel for appellant submits that Tribunal erred in awarding meager amount of compensation. It is contended that learned Claims Tribunal failed to award proper and suitable compensation for 4 attendant, special diet and for conveyance expenses. It is submitted that learned Claims Tribunal has not awarded any amount towards grievous injuries suffered by appellant. He prays that amount of compensation be suitably enhanced. 7. Learned counsel for respondent No.3-Insurance Company opposes the submission of learned counsel for appellant. He would submit that the learned Tribunal awarded just and proper compensation on all heads, which does not call for any interference. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 9. Perusal of the pleadings and evidence would show that in accident appellant suffered fracture in right knee and also suffered injuries in right shoulder. He was hospitalized from 17.06.2016 to 24.06.2016, his leg was operated and iron rod was implanted. Discharge summary is filed and marked as Ex.P-7, showing admission of patient on 17.06.2016 and discharge on 24.06.2016. As per discharge summary, appellant suffered dislocation of right knee and other injury in chest. Further perusal of the discharge summary would show that it was fixed with screw and endobutton. However, the learned Claims Tribunal failed to award any amount towards grievous injuries, therefore, looking to the injuries suffered and period of treatment as inpatient, I find it appropriate to award Rs.20,000/- towards grievous injuries. It is ordered accordingly. 10. Perusal of the impugned award would show that learned Claims Tribunal has awarded Rs.10,700/- towards medical expenses. Learned counsel for the appellant could not able to point out that medical bills, 5 which is placed on record admissible in evidence was not considered and awarded, therefore, the amount of compensation under the head of medical expenses does not call for any interference. 11. The learned Claims Tribunal further awarded Rs.4,000/- towards attendant, Rs.8,000/- for special diet and conveyance expenses, Rs.20,000/- pain and suffering, and Rs.16,000/- for loss of income during laid down period. Looking to the nature of injuries suffered I find it appropriate enhance the amount awarded towards attendant of Rs.4,000/- to Rs.8,000/- and the amount awarded for special diet and conveyance of Rs.8,000/- to Rs.10,000/-. Award of Rs.20,000/- for pain and suffering, Rs.16,000/- for loss of income in the facts and circumstances of the case and looking to the nature of injuries suffered by the appellant, is just and proper, which does not call for any interference. 12. On the basis of above, compensation awarded needs recomputation, which is as under :- SN Head Amount (in Rs.). 1. For medical expenses : 10,700.00 2. For attendant : 8,000.00 3. For special diet and conveyance expenses : 10,000.00 4. For pain and suffering : 20,000.00 5. For loss of income : 16,000.00 6. For grievous injuries : 20,0000.00 Grand Total : 84,700.00 13. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part. Now the appellants shall be entitled for total compensation of Rs.84,700.00. Any amount paid to the appellants as compensation as per impugned award shall be 6 adjusted. Enhanced amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 8% per annum from the date of filing of application till its realization. Rest of the conditions mentioned in the impugned award shall remain intact. 14. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part and the award impugned stands modified to the extent indicated above. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Balram