1 2025:CGHC:15423 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1043 of 2020 1 - Vinod Kumar Sahu S/o Late Hemu Kumar Sahu, Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Rudri, Tahsil And District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh................Claimant, District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant Versus 1 - Ajeet Netam S/o Deshuram Netam, Aged About 21 Years R/o Village Bendranawagaon, Tahsil And District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh....................(Driver Of The Vehicle), District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh 2 - Ajay Verma, S/o Gaindsingh Verma, Aged About 44 Years R/o Housing Board Colony, Dhamtari, Tahsil And District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh...............(Owner Of The Vehicle), District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh 3 - Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd., In Front Of L.I.C. Office, Pandri, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh..................Insurer, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Appellant : Mr. Kunal Das, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Ashish Pandey, Advocate along with Mr. B.N. Nande, Advocate S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order On Board 02/04/2025 1. This appeal is filed by the appellants seeking enhancement of the amount of compensation awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal in its SHUBHAM DEY Digitally signed by SHUBHAM DEY 2 award dated 17.03.2020 passed by the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Dhamtari, District – Dhamtari (C.G.) in Claim Case No. 50/2018. 2. Facts of the case in brief are that, on 05.07.2017, the applicant was traveling on his motorcycle bearing registration no. CG 05 AB 2433 and going towards Village Rudri from Village Limtara and when he reached near Laxmi Niwas, Dhamtari, one pick-up bearing Registration No. CG 05 D 0242 (offending vehicle) driven by the Respondent No. 1 rashly and negligently, dashed the two-wheeler. In the accident, appellant suffered serious injuries. Subsequent to the accident, a crime was registered against the Respondent No. 1 bearing Crime No. 411/2017 at P.S. City Kotwali, District – Dhamtari. 3. Learned counsel for appellant submits that the motor accident of the appellant is not in dispute and the liability fastened upon the insurance company is also not in dispute. The appellant has filed this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation as the learned Claims Tribunal has awarded meager amount of compensation overlooking the nature of injury and disability suffered by the appellant over his body. 4. He contended that at the time of accident i.e. 05.10.2017, the appellant was 30 years of age, he has to suffer and face problems due to temporary disability for rest of his life, as the appellant due to the said accident has suffered 30% temporary disability due to injuries on his right palm, left knee and teeth. Learned Claims Tribunal has awarded very meager sum of Rs. 25,000/- for pains and suffering. He further contended that the amount of compensation awarded on other heads is also on the lower side in the facts of the case looking to the date of accident, nature of injuries suffered and the part of the body which suffered disability. Learned Claims Tribunal has not awarded compensation towards loss of income to the appellant during the 3 laid down period for which, he was entitled. Therefore, the amount of compensation awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal be suitably enhanced. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Respondent No. 3 opposes the submission made by the counsel for the appellant and would submit that the learned Claims Tribunal after considering the nature of injury, disability suffered by the appellant, evidence available on record had awarded compensation on almost all the heads for which, he is entitled. He contended that considering the temporary disability to the extent of 30% for the whole body, learned Claims Tribunal calculating the income of the appellant based on the notional income of unskilled labour has calculated the amount and has awarded Rs. 75,000/- towards the temporary disability. Further, Rs. 47,577/- has been awarded towards the medical bills produced and proved, Rs.25,000/- has been awarded towards pains and sufferings. Hence, the award passed by the learned Claims Tribunal is just and proper and does not call for any interference. He do not dispute the liability fastened upon the insurance company to pay the amount of compensation. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records of learned Claims Tribunal. 7. Learned Claims Tribunal on appreciation of evidence has found that the appellant has failed to prove the nature of employment in the Irrigation Department, Dhamtari and the income pleaded was not found to be proved as there was no documentary evidence produced and proved by the appellant for assessment of his income and assessed the income of appellant on notional basis to be Rs. 7,800/-, considering the minimum wages notified by the competent authority under the 4 Minimum Wages Act, 1948 which was prevailing on the date of accident. 8. Perusal of the award dated 17.03.2020 would show that the accident, nature of injury and the disability suffered by the appellant is not in dispute as the injuries suffered by the appellant had not caused permanent disability to the appellant which was also proved before the learned Claims Tribunal. The appellant suffered 30% temporary disability over her right palm, left knee and as per the disability certificate (Ex. P-70) proved by Dr. Vinod Pandey (A.W. - 2). Learned Claims Tribunal has rightly calculated the income of the appellant based on the notional income of unskilled labour and awarded Rs. 75,000/- towards the temporary disability. 9. Looking to the nature of injuries suffered, it may be possible that the appellant could not be able to do the work as Labourer for a period of 03 months and therefore, in the opinion of this Court, the appellant is entitled for loss income for a period of 03 months. Accordingly, the appellant is entitled for loss of income during laid down period for a period of 03 months which comes to Rs. 23400/- (7800X3). 10. Learned Claims Tribunal has already awarded amount towards the medical expenses to the tune of Rs. 47,577/-. Learned counsel for the appellant failed to prove that any bills produced and proved was not considered by the learned Claims Tribunal and has not been awarded. Learned Claims Tribunal has also awarded a sum of Rs. 25,000/- towards the pains and sufferings. 11. Now, the appellant claimant shall be entitled for a total sum of Rs. 1,70,977/- (i.e. Rs. 75,000 + 23,400 + 25,000 + 47,577) instead Rs. 1,47,577/-. This amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 7.5% 5 from the date of filing of claim application till its realization. Rest of the conditions mentioned in the impugned award shall remain intact. 12. Any amount already paid to Claimants/Appellant as compensation pursuant to impugned award shall be adjusted from the total amount of compensation as calculated above. 13. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part and the impugned award stands modified to the extent indicated above. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- ------/--/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Dey