1 2025:CGHC:6513 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 824 of 2023 1 - Gaindram Verma S/o Lt. Bisauha Ram Verma Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Ghoghre, Police Station Chhuikhadan, Tahsil Chhuikhadan, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh (Claimant) ... Appellant/ Claimant versus 1 - Paras Ram Dhruv S/o Sahdev Dhruv Aged About 43 Years R/o Village Madhuban, Tahsil Bhatapara, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh (Driver Of Truck No. C G-04-J A-7159) 2 - Vivek Agrawal S/o Lakeshwar Prasad Agrawal Aged About 49 Years R/o 107, Gandhi Mandir Ward, Near Aditya Hospital Bhatapara, Tahsil Bhatapara, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh (Owner Of Truck No. C G-04-J A-7159) 3 - The New India Insurance Company Ltd. Branch Office-Ambedkar Chowk Near Union Bank Bhatapara, Tahsil Bhatapara, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh (Insurer Of Truck No. C G-04-J A- 7159) ---- Respondents For Appellant : Mr. Akash Shrivastava, Advocate. For Respondents No.1 & 2 : Mr. Vivek Shrivastava, Advocate. For the Insurance Company : Mr. Dashrath Gupta, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 05.02.2025 1. The injured/claimant has filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act for enhancement of compensation against the award passed by the learned Additional Motor Accident Claims Digitally signed by SMT NIRMALA RAO -2- Tribunal, Khairagarh, in Claim Case No. 42 of 2022, dated 17.4.2023, whereby compensation of Rs.3,05,926/- along with interest @ 7.5% from the date of filing of the claim application till payment was awarded in favour of the appellant. 2. The facts of the present case are that on 14.4.2022, at about 7:30 am, the appellant/claimant, along with his son, was on their way to the hospital, near the Paddy Procurement Centre at village Mandrakuhi, a Truck bearing registration No.CG-04-JA-7159, which was being driven rashly and negligently by respondent No.1 (the Driver), collided with the motorcycle bearing registration No. CG-08-AS-1303. In the accident, one Lekharam Sahu lost his life, whereas the appellant sustained serious injuries. The claimant pleaded that he suffered a fracture in his left hand and could not work for a period of six months. It is also stated that he spent Rs.3,00,000/- on treatment, and future medical expenses would amount to Rs.4,00,000/-. Additionally, it was stated that the claimant, aged about 50 years, was working as a temporary employee in the Water Resources Department, Chhuikhadan, and earning Rs.9,200/- per month. The claimant sought Rs.10,60,400/- as compensation. The Insurance Company, along with the driver and owner of the vehicle, filed a reply to the application and denied the contents. Learned Tribunal framed issues, the parties led evidence and the learned Tribunal passed the award as stated above. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the claimant would submit that the leaned Tribunal has awarded meager amount towards pain and 3 suffering, transportation, special diet, assistance and future medical expenses. He would contend that the learned Tribunal has awarded Rs.25,000/- under the head of pain and suffering, Rs.10,000/- for future medical expenses, Rs.5,000/- for special diet, Rs.3,000/- for assistance and Rs.5,000/- for transportation. He would further submit that the claimant could not work for a period of six months due to fracture in his left hand. He would further contend that the appellant visited hospital several times, but a meager amount of Rs.5,000/- has been awarded by the learned Tribunal for transportation. He would contend that as there was a fracture in his left hand, he had to visit the hospital with an attendant. For a period of five months, the appellant required a special diet. He would also submit that the appellant suffered trauma, and a meager amount has been awarded by the learned Tribunal. In future, the appellant will need to consult a doctor for the removal of the iron rod, for which the learned Tribunal has awarded only Rs.10,000/- only. He would pray to award just and proper compensation on the above-stated heads. 4. On the other hand, Mr. Dashrath Gupta, learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company would oppose the submissions made by counsel for the appellant. He would submit that the learned Tribunal has awarded just and proper compensation on each and every head. He would further submit that the claimant has failed to prove the expenses under the above-stated heads by leading clinching evidence. He would state that the appeal deserves to be dismissed. -4- 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents present on the record with utmost circumspection. 6. A perusal of the record would show that the age of the appellant at the time of the accident was 50 years. He lost his son in the accident. There was a fracture in the left hand of the claimant. A disability certificate of 40% was also issued by the Medical Board; however, since there is no functional disability, compensation cannot be assessed based on it, and therefore, the disability certificate cannot serve as a basis for determining compensation. The appellant underwent treatment for a considerable time and was admitted at VY Care Hospital, Rajnandgaon, where surgery on his left hand was performed. 7. Taking into consideration the trauma suffered by the appellant, the frequent visits from Khairagarh to Rajnandgaon, the necessity of a special diet, the requirement of an attendant, and the need for future medical treatment, it appears that the learned Tribunal has awarded meager amount, therefore, the compensation under the following heads is enhanced as follows:- S.No. Under the Heads Awarded Enhanced 1. Transportation 5,000/- 20,000/- 2. Attendant 3,000/- 10,000/- 3. Special Diet 5,000/- 10,000/- 4. Future Medical Expenses 10,000/- 20,000/- 5. Pain & Suffering 25,000/- 50,000/- Total 48,000/- 1,10,000/- 8. As per the above assessment, the appellant shall be entitled to get an additional sum of Rs.62,000/- in addition to the compensation 5 already awarded. This amount shall be paid within a period of 60 days from today before the concerned Claims Tribunal. The rest of the conditions regarding the rate of interest and other terms shall remain intact. 9. Accordingly, the present appeal is allowed in part. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nimmi