[2025:RJ-JP:25288] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 3084/2007 Ramvilas S/o Sh. Jahawar Lal aged about 65 years R/o Gudliya Hall, Annpurna, Tonk Rajasthan. ----Appellant/Claimant Versus 1. Dev Hans S/o Sh. Hazari Lal R/o Sadari, Tehsil Aligarh, District Tonk. 2. Raja Ram S/o Sh. Gopal R/o Sadari, Tehsil Aligarh Hall, Plot No.5859, Khandelwal Nagar, Agra Road, Jaipur. 3. The New India Insurance Co. Ltd., Transport Nagar, Jaipur ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Arnav Singh for Ms. Sonia Shandliya For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vimal Kumar Yadav Mr. Rishipal Agarwal HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA Order 09/07/2025 1. The present appeal has been filed by the claimant under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 (hereinafter to be referred to as "the Act of 1988") for enhancement of compensation assailing the award dated 02.05.2007 passed by the District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track No.3, Tonk (Motor Accident Claims Tribunal), Tonk (hereinafter to be referred to as the "learned Tribunal") in Claim Case No.32/2005(700/2004), whereby the claim petition filed by the claimant-appellant has been partly allowed. 2. Brief facts giving rise to the present appeal are that on 28.05.2004, the claimant-Ramvilas along with his son Kamlesh was going to Gudaliya from Tonk on his motorcycle bearing No.RJ- 26-M-5501, while passing through Village power house, another motorcycle bearing No.RJ-14-44M-8439, which was coming from the wrong side and being driven by respondent No.1-Dev Hans in [2025:RJ-JP:25288] (2 of 5) [CMA-3084/2007] a rash and negligent manner at high speed, collided with the claimant/appellant-Ramvilas. As a result of the accident, the claimant/appellant's right leg was fractured and has also sustained serious injuries on his hands and right collar bone. 3. At the time of the accident, age of the claimant was 62 years and he was earning Rs.8,000/- per month by performing Seva Puja as a Pujari. Therefore, the claimant filed the claim petition seeking just and proper compensation. 4. Notice of the claim petition was issued to non-claimants/respondents No.1 and 2, despite service of the notice, they did not appear before the Tribunal, thereafter, ex- parte proceedings were drawn against them. 5. The non-claimants/respondent No.3-Insurance Company filed a detailed reply to the claim petition, wherein they have denied the averments made in the claim petition and submitted that the driver of the insured vehicle No.RJ-14-44M-8439 was not having a valid and effective license and it was also pleaded that accident occurred due to negligence of the injured, therefore, the Insurance Company is not liable to pay compensation. 6. That on the basis of pleading of the parties, the learned Tribunal framed eight issues. 7. In order to substantiate the plea and averments of the claim, the claimant examined AW-1 Ramavtar, AW-2 Mojiram, AW-3 Kamlesh Sharma and AW-4 Rambilas, and produced documents Ex.1 to Ex.55. 8. The non-claimants/respondent-Insurance Company, despite granting opportunity, choose not to led any evidence. [2025:RJ-JP:25288] (3 of 5) [CMA-3084/2007] 9. After hearing arguments of both the respective parties, the learned Tribunal, by determining Rs.2,000/- as monthly income, applying the multiplier of 5 and considering 39% permanent disability and other medical expenses, awarded compensation of Rs.84,950/- along with interest @ 6% from the date of filing of the claim petition. 10. Being aggrieved of which, the claimant/appellant has preferred the present appeal. 11. Learned counsel for the claimant/appellant submits that the amount so awarded by the learned Tribunal under the impugned award is inadequate, although the learned Tribunal has considered that the claimant/appellant has sustained several injuries, but under the head of pain and suffering, only Rs.18,000/- has been awarded. He also submits that the learned Tribunal has taken into consideration that during the period of treatment, appellant has to take a nutritional diet for speedy recovery, but the learned Tribunal has awarded a meager sum of Rs.1,500/- which is inadequate. Therefore, he prays that the impugned award may be modified and compensation may be kindly enhanced to some extent. 12. Per contra, the learned counsel for the non-claimant/respondent-Insurance Company vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the claimant/appellant and he submits that the impugned order is just and proper and does not call for any interference by this Court. 13. Heard and considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. [2025:RJ-JP:25288] (4 of 5) [CMA-3084/2007] 14. From the record of the case, it is revealed that the claimant/appellant has sustained several injuries like fracture in his leg, serious injuries on his hands as well as on his right collar bone, which is evident from injury report (Ex.54) and X-ray report (Ex.55). Claimant/appellant was hospitalized for 6-7 days (Ex.10- Discharge certificate) and remained under treatment for more than two months, but under the head of pain and suffering only Rs.18,000/- has been awarded. 15. From the record of the case, it is revealed that claimant sustained several injuries and remained under treatment for more than two months and the learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.1,500/- under the head of 'food and nutrition'. 16. Looking to the injuries sustained by the claimant/appellant, this Court is of the opinion that amount awarded under heads of 'pain and suffering' and 'food and nutrition' are require enhancement. After taking holistic consideration of the above facts, this Court is of the opinion that the compensation awarded under the impugned award requires enhancement to some extent and same is enhanced as per the table made hereinunder:- Loss of income Rs.2,000x12x5x39%=46,800/- Loss of income during the recovery period (+) Rs.2,000x2=4,000/- Pain & Suffering(+) Rs.22,000/- Medical Bill & Hospitalization Rs.13,150/- Food/Nourishment(+) Rs.10,000/- Hospital Transport(+) Rs.1,500/- Total Rs.97,450/- Already Awarded Amount(-) Rs.84,950/- Enhanced amount of compensation Rs.12,500/- [2025:RJ-JP:25288] (5 of 5) [CMA-3084/2007] 17. Therefore, the present appeal is partly allowed and award passed by the learned MACT Court below is modified by enhancing to Rs. 97,450/- from the original amount of Rs.84,950/-. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced amount of Rs.12,500/- before the learned concerned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal within 60 days from the date of passing of this order. The claimant is also entitled to get interest on the enhanced amount of Rs.12,500 /- at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition until the realization of the said amount. 18. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed. The compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal is modified and enhanced as per the terms indicated above. 19. All pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. (MANEESH SHARMA),J SOURAV /65