1 2025:CGHC:48775 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 2228 of 2019  Khooblal Sahu S/o Ratiram Sahu Aged About 42 Years Occupation Auto Repairing , R/o Village Kotgaon, Chowki Birejhar, P.S. Kurud, Tehsil And District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh., District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant(s) versus 1. K.K. Majumdar S/o Lt. Kumudanikant Majumdar Aged About 50 Years Occupation Owner Of Vehicle Scorpio, R/o Chakradhar Nagar Raigarh Tehsil And District Raigarh Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 2. United India Insurance Company Ltd. Branch Office Shanti Palace, Near Sarla Vila, Chakradhar Nagar Chowk , District Raigarh Chhattisgarh. Through Divisional Manager, Divisional Office, Krishna Complex, Kachehari Chowk, Raipur Tehsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh Policy No. 2704023114 P 103198079 Valid From 05.08.2014 To 04.08.2015, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3. Golu Sidar S/o Trinath Sidar Aged About 22 Years R/o Chakradhar Nagar, Prem Nagar, P.S. Chakradhar , District Raigarh Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Appellant/Claimant : Mr. Akhilesh Mishra, Advocate For Respondents No. 1& 3 : Ms. Pooja Yadav, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. Shivendu Pandya, Advocate For Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Pravesh Sahu, Advocate along with Mr. P.R. Patankar, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 23. 09.2025 1. The appellant has filed this appeal for enhancement of compensation against award passed by the First Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur in Claim Case No. 603/2015 dated 23.10.2019, whereby the learned Tribunal has passed an award to the tune of Rs. 2,39,000/- with SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Digitally signed by SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Date: 2025.09.26 14:39:54 +0530 2 interest at the rate of 9% per anum. 2. Mr. Akhilesh Mishra, Advocate would submit that on 18.10.2015 at about 1.30 pm, the appellant repaired a motorcycle bearing registration No. C.G. 04 FE 2231 and when he reached near main road of Mandi Gate, Dhamtari Road, the driver of the offending vehicle by driving his motorcycle bearing registration No. C.G. 13 C 9165 rashly and negligently dashed the motorcycle resultantly, the appellant sustained injuries over ankle, knee and other part of body. 3. Mr. Mishra would submit that the appellant remained hospitalized for considerable period and after surgery a steel rod was inserted in his left leg. He would contend that the appellant suffered permanent disability to the extent of 42%. He would further submit that the respondents filed reply. The learned Tribunal framed issues, and thereafter, passed an award. It is argued that though the learned Tribunal assessed the functional disability to the extent of 15%, but assessed the income treating it 10% and such finding is erroneous. He would further contend that the learned Tribunal has awarded meager amount of compensation for pain and suffering, special diet, conveyance and attendant. He would pray to enhance the compensation. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for respondents would oppose. They would submit that the learned Tribunal has assessed functional disability 10%. They would contend that there was no loss of earning, as the injury sustained on the left leg of the appellant has not affected his employment as he was working as Mechanic. They would also submit that the learned Tribunal has passed just and proper award while granting compensation on conventional heads. They would contend that the instant appeal deserves to be dismissed. 3 5. I have learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6. As per disability certificate issued by the Medical Board, the extent of disability is 42%. The learned Tribunal assessed the functional disability 15% while deciding issue No. 2, but reduced it 10% without assigning any cogent reason; therefore, such finding appears to be erroneous. The learned Tribunal has assessed notional income of the appellant Rs. 72,000/- and applied multiplier of 15. On other conventional heads, the learned Tribunal has awarded lump sum amount of Rs. 30,000/- and for pain and suffering awarded Rs. 30,000/-, which appears to be at lower side. 7. As the learned Tribunal assessed the functional disability 15%, the loss of earning will be 15% of 72,000/- i.e. 10,800/-. The learned Tribunal ought to have assessed the loss of earnings accordingly. The learned Tribunal has not assigned reasons for awarding a lump sum amount of Rs. 30,000/- on conventional heads, therefore, the compensation is being revisited herein- below :- Sr. No Heads Compensation awarded by Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1. Medical Expenses Rs. 35,000/- Rs. 35,000/- 2. Conveyance Rs. 30,000/- Rs. 10,000/- 3. Attendant Rs. 10,000/- 4. Special Diet Rs. 10,000/- 5. Loss of earning Loss of future income + Loss of six months’ income Rs. 1,08,000 + Rs. 36,000 = Rs. Rs. 1,62,000 + 36,000 = Rs. 1,98,000/- 4 1,44,000/- 6. Pain and suffering Rs. 30,000/- Rs. 50,000/- TOTAL Rs. 2,39,000 Rs. 3,13,000/- 8. For the forgoing reasons, the appeal is allowed in part. The amount of compensation of Rs. 2,39,000/- awarded by the tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 3,13,000/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs. 2,39,000/-, the appellant/claimant is held entitled for an additional amount of Rs. 74,000/-. The Insurance company is directed to deposit the amount of compensation as enhanced by this Court within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Rest of the conditions of impugned award shall remain intact. 9.Accordingly, the instant appeal is hereby partly allowed. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge $iddhant