1 2025:CGHC:59464 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1797 of 2024 Smt. Kanwala Bai Arya Wd/o Late Milap Singh Aged About 70 Years R/o Village- Regadbari Police Station- Mangchuwa, Tehsil Dandilohara, District- Balod, Chhattisgarh. (Claimant/ Injured) ... Appellant versus 1 - Akhilesh Kumar Alias Akhilesh Sinha S/o Krishna Lal Sinha Aged About 27 Years Caste Kalar, R/o Village Regadbari, Police Station Mangchuwa Teh. Dandilohara, District Balod, Chhattsigarh. (Driver Of Tractor No. C.G. 08 A.L. 1736). 2 - Krishna Lal Sinha S/o Mahesh Ram Sinha Aged About 59 Years Caste Kalar, R/o Village Regadbari, Police Station Mangchuwa Teh. Dandilohara, District Balod, Chhattsigarh. (Owner Of Tractor No. C.G. 08 A.L. 1736). 3 - I.F.F.C.O. Tokio General Inc. Ltd. Through Branch Manager, Regional Office, 2nd Floor Shop No. 205, M.M. Silver Plaza Opp. Udyog Bhawan Near Mining Office Ring Road No. 1, Raipur, Tehsil And District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. (Insurer Of Tractor No. C.G. 08 A.L. 1736). ... Respondent(s) For Appellant : Mr. Prakhar Dashore, Advocate, holding the brief of Mr. R. S. Patel, Advocate For Respondent No.3 : Ms. Shrishti Uttal, Advocate Digitally signed by NADIM MOHLE 2 Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment on Board 08/12/2025 1. The claimant/appellant has preferred the present appeal seeking enhancement of compensation against the award dated 22.07.2024 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Balod, District Balod, in Claim Case No. 63/2021, whereby the learned Tribunal has granted a sum of Rs. 1,02,000/- with interest @ 6% per annum on account of injuries sustained by her. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that on 10.06.2019, the claimant was dashed by respondent No.1, who was driving the offending Tractor bearing Registration No. CG-08A-AL-1736 in a rash and negligent manner, resultantly, she sustained injuries on her waist, right leg, and thigh. She sustained three fractures in the waist region and remained hospitalized for 13 days at Sparsh Multispeciality Hospital, Durg. He would further submit that the claimant filed a claim petition and claimed compensation to the tune of Rs. 11,30,000/-. She pleaded that she suffered permanent injuries. The Insurance Company filed its reply denied the averments made in the claim petition. The parties led evidence, and thereafter, the impugned award was passed. 3. He would also submit that the learned Tribunal assessed the claimant’s monthly income at Rs. 5,000 and awarded Rs. 15,000 towards loss of income (Rs. 5,000 × 3 months) and assessment of income is on the lower side. He argued that that the minimum wages admissible to an unskilled labourer in the month of June 2019 was Rs. 8,400. He would contend that on other heads also, the learned Tribunal has awarded meagre amounts. 3 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the learned Tribunal has awarded only Rs. 7,000 towards conveyance, Rs. 5,000 towards pain and suffering and Rs. 5,000 towards attendant charges. He further submits that no compensation has been awarded for special diet; thus, he prays for enhancement of the award. 5. On the other hand, Ms. Shrishti Uttal, learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company would support the impugned award and submits that the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal is just and proper. She contends that the claimant failed to examine the treating doctor and also failed to prove permanent disability and thus, the learned Tribunal rightly assessed the loss of income. She submits that the appeal deserves to be dismissed. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 7. Admittedly, the claimant suffered injuries including fractures and remained hospitalized for 13–15 days. However, the claimant failed to examine the treating doctor to establish seriousness of the injuries. 8. The learned Tribunal assessed the claimant’s income at Rs. 5,000 per month, which appears to be on the lower side and not in consonance with the minimum wages applicable at the relevant time. The minimum wages admissible to an unskilled labourer in the month of June 2019 was Rs. 8,400 and the learned Tribunal ought to have considered the same while computing the loss of earnings. Further, the compensation awarded under the heads of conveyance and pain and suffering is meagre. The learned Tribunal failed to grant compensation for special diet. Accordingly, the compensation requires recomputation as under:- Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded by Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1. Monthly Income Rs. 5,000 Rs.8,400 4 Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded by Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 2. Loss of earning 5,000 x 3 = Rs.15,000/- Rs. 8,400 x 3 = Rs.25,200/- 3. Attendant Rs.5,000 Rs.15,000 /- 4. Conveyance Rs.7,000/- Rs.15,000/- 5. Special Diet None Rs.15,000/- 6. Medical Bills Rs.70,000/- Rs.70,000/- 7. Pain and suffering Rs.5,000/- Rs. 25,000/- 8. Total Compensation Rs.1,02,000/- Rs.1,65,200 9. Final Compensation Rs.1,65,200 - 1,02,000 = 63,200 Rs. 63,200 9. In view of the above calculation, the claimant shall be entitled to an additional sum of Rs. 63,200/-. The insurance company is directed to pay the enhanced compensation Rs. 63,200/- with interest @6% per annum to the appellant/claimant within a period of 60 days. Rest of the terms and condition of the award shall remain intact. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the claimant is allowed in part to the extent indicated hereinabove. Sd/- Rakesh Mohan Pandey JUDGE Nadim