1 / 5 2025:CGHC:40407 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 449 of 2021 • Akshay Joshi Son of Amritlal Joshi Aged About 24 Years Resident of Ward No. 12, Village Barounda, P.S. Mana Camp, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. --- Appellant/ Applicant-claimant versus 1. Shekh Riyaz @ Bablu Son of Shekh Jahir Aged About 35 Years Resident of Afroj Bag Near Satish Kirana Shop, Moudhapara, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) (Driver of Offending Vehicle I-10 Car Bearing Registration No. C.G. - 04 K.J. - 7559) 2. Kanhaiya Lal Mathani Son of Bhawan Dasav Mathani Resident of Jhule Lal Chowk, Naharpara, Gajanand Oil Mill, P.S. Ganj, Raipur Other Address - Through Vijay Daganiya, Son of Vishandas Daganiya, Shriram Heritez Katoratalab, Civil Line, Raipur Chhattisgarh. (Owner of offending Vehicle I-10 Car Bearing Registration No. C.G.-04 K.J.- 7559) 3. The New India Insurance Company Ltd. Through Divisional Manager, The New India Insurance Company Ltd. Near Bajrang Hotel, R.D.A. Building, G.E. Road, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. (Insurer of offending Vehicle I-10 Car Bearing Registration No. C.G.- 04 K.J.- 7559) --- Respondents/ Non-applicants ____________________________________________________________ For Appellants : Mrs. Dhaneshwari Patel Advocate on behalf of Mr. Pushpendra Kumar Patel, Advocate For Respondents No. 1 & 2 : None appeared, though served. For Respondent No. 3 : Mr. Priyanshu Gupta, Advocate on behalf of Mr. B.N. Nande, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Judgment On Board 12/08/2025 1. Appellant/ claimant has filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “Act of 1988”) challenging the impugned award PAWAN KUMAR JHA Digitally signed by PAWAN KUMAR JHA 2 / 5 dated 16.03.2021 passed by Learned Second Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal of First Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh (for short “Claims Tribunal”) in Claim Case No. 326/2019, whereby learned Claims Tribunal allowed the application filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 in part and awarded total sum of ₹ 5,27,922/- as compensation in a motor accidental injury case and fastened liability to satisfy the amount of compensation upon non-applicant No. 3-insurance company. 2. This appeal filed by the claimant seeking enhancement of the amount of compensation as awarded by the Claims Tribunal. The factum of motor accident that occurred on 24.12.2018 at about 07:30 a.m., involvement of a car bearing number CG04-KJ-7559 (hereinafter referred to as “offending car”) owned by non-applicant No. 2, driven by non-applicant No. 1, as well as the liability of insurer- non-applicant No. 3- to satisfy the compensation amount as determined, are not disputed by the parties before this Court. 3. In view of the above admitted position, this Court does not deem it necessary to once again traverse the entire factual matrix of the accident as set out in the claim application, reply filed by non-applicants thereof, and further adverted in the impugned award. The present adjudication is, therefore, confined solely to the limited issue of the claimant’s grievance with respect to the quantum of compensation awarded. The Court will accordingly examine only the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the respective parties, on enhancement of compensation. 4. Learned counsel for appellant-claimant would submit that the Claims Tribunal erred in awarding meager sum of compensation. She submits that though the compensation under the head of medical expenses is awarded as ₹ 4,53,422, however, Claims Tribunal erred in not awarding any amount towards future treatment overlooking the nature of injuries suffered by 3 / 5 appellant. She next contended that the Claims Tribunal awarded only ₹ 12,000 towards loss of income for a period of 02 months assessing income of injured as ₹ 6,000 per month. She submits that even if the claimant failed to prove nature of occupation and income as pleaded in the application then also the Claims Tribunal ought to have assessed income keeping in mind wages prevailing on the date of accident at the place of which claimant is resident of. Tribunal has awarded less amount of compensation on other heads also. 5. Learned counsel for Respondent No. 3-Insurance Company would oppose the submission of learned counsel for appellant and would submit that the award of compensation is just and proper. He submits that the claimant has not produced any document to show that claimant will require future treatment. Total compensation awarded in the facts of the case is upon appreciation of evidence available on record, hence, the award of amount of compensation does not call for any interference. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the record. 7. Perusal of impugned award would show that the Claims Tribunal has awarded ₹ 4,53,422 as medical expenses, ₹ 25,000 towards pain and sufferings and ₹ 25,000 towards special diet and conveyance etc. Perusal of Ext. P-11, Discharge Card of Rajdhani Super Speciality Hospital would show that appellant suffered following injury as mentioned in final diagnosis column.: Head injury- left Le Fort I fracture cJ left zygomaticomaxillary complex (ZMC) fracture, cJ Rt. condyle of the mandible and symphysis cJ thrust injury; dentoalveolar fracture; Distal pendulus left cJ I.C. Humerus left. 8. Perusal of discharge card would show that the appellant suffered multiple injuries over his upper part of the body and also fracture of distal pendulus left . He also suffered injuries on toe and dentoalveolar fracture and mandible. 4 / 5 9. In the aforementioned facts of the case, Claims Tribunal erred in not awarding any compensation to claimant towards grievous injuries suffered and, therefore, I find it appropriate to award a sum of ₹ 15,000 towards grievous injuries. It is ordered accordingly. 10. Claims Tribunal has assessed monthly income of claimant as ₹ 6,000 per month only. Claimant is aged about 24 years. Even if occupation and income as pleaded in the claim application could not be proved by producing admissible evidence then also the Claims Tribunal could have assessed income of claimant keeping in mind minimum wages as prevailing on the date of accident at the place of which appellant is resident of ie., Mana Camp, nearby to Raipur City. Date of accident is 24.12.2018 and according to the minimum wages fixed by the competent authority for the period from 01.10.2018 to 31.03.2019 for unskilled labourer is fixed as ₹ 8,660 per month and therefore I find it appropriate to assess income of appellant to be ₹ 8,600 per month (after rounding it off). It is ordered accordingly. 11. Amount of compensation towards laid down period of two months cannot be said to be less and therefore claimant will be entitled for loss of income of ₹ 17,200 (8600x2) for the period of treatment. Considering the nature of injury, multiple fracture over person of claimant, I find it appropriate to award a sum of ₹ 10,000 towards future medical treatment expenses. Amount of compensation awarded towards pain and suffering and conveyance expenses is just and proper which does not call for any interference. As per the discharge card, it appears that the claimant remain admitted for about 23 days, even after discharge looking to the nature of injuries, he might have taken assistant of some other person and therefore I find it appropriate to award a sum of ₹ 8,000 towards attender. 12. For the foregoing discussion, the amount of compensation to be awarded to appellants-claimants requires re-computation, which is as under. 5 / 5 Particulars Compensation Medical Expenses (maintained) ₹ 4,53,422/- Pain and suffering (maintained) ₹ 25,000/- Special diet and conveyance etc.(maintained) ₹ 25,000/- Grievous injuries ₹ 15,000/- Future Medical Treatment expenses ₹ 10,000/- Loss of income for two months (8600x2) ₹ 17,200/- Attender ₹ 8,000/- Total ₹ 5,53,622/- 13. Now the appellant/claimant shall be entitled for total sum of compensation of ₹ 5,53,622/- instead of ₹ 5,27,922/- as awarded by learned Claims Tribunal. The enhanced amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 8% p.a. from the date of filing of claim application till its realization. • Any amount paid to the appellant-claimant pursuant to the impugned award shall be adjusted from the amount of compensation as calculated above. • Rest of the conditions as imposed by the Claims Tribunal in the impugned award shall remain intact. 14. In the result, appeal is allowed in part and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge pwn