1 2025:CGHC:54842 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 50 of 2019 * - Subhash Tiwari S/o Shri Chotelal Tiwari Aged About 45 Years R/o Ward No. 35, Durga Nagar Beergaon, Bhanpuri, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh --- Appellant/Claimant Versus 1 - C.H. Someshwar Rao S/o Shri S.H. Nanaji Rao, R/o Village Saluru, Vijay Nagaram, Andhra Pradesh (Driver Of The Offending Vehicle Bearing No. W.B. 15 A 4199, District : Vizianagaram, Andhra Pradesh 2 - B. Krishnamurti S. S/o Late Gurumurti R/o D.No. 28-85 Ward No. 8 Main Raod Salur Vijaynagaram, Andhra Pradesh (Ownwe Of The Offeneding Bearing No. W.B. 15a 4199, District : Vizianagaram, Andhra Pradesh 3 - United India General Insurance Company Ltd. Branch Office Patvatipurm, Main Road Parvatipurm District Vijaynagaram Andhra Pradesh United India Insurance Company Ltd , Through Regional Manager, Regional Office Krishna Complex Kachari, Chowk Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh (Insurer Of The Offending Vehicle Bearing No. W.B. 15 A 4199, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh --- Respondents For Appellant/Claimant : Mr. Akhilesh Mishra, Advocate For Respondents No.3/ Insurance Company : Mr. Dashrath Gupta, Advocate And MAC No. 623 of 2019 * - United India Insurance Company Limited Through Its Divisional Manager, Divisional Office Krishna Complex, Kutchery Chowk, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---Appellant Versus 1 - Subhash Tiwari S/o Shri Chhotelal Tiwari Aged About 45 Years R/o Ward No. 35, Durga Nagar, Beergaon, Bhanpuri, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh Digitally signed by RAMESH KUMAR VATTI Date: 2025.11.12 17:17:52 +0530 2 2 - C. H. Someshwar Rao S/o Shri C. H. Nanaji Rao R/o Village Saluru, Vijaynagaram Andhra Pradesh .............Driver (Non Applicant No. 01), District : Vizianagaram, Andhra Pradesh 3 - B. Krishnamurthy S. S/o Late Gurumurthy R/o D No. 28-85, Ward No. 8, Mainroad, Salur, Vijaynagaram Andhra Pradesh ............ (Non Applicant No. 02), District : Vizianagaram, Andhra Pradesh --- Respondents For Appellant/ Insurance Company : Mr. Dashrath Gupta, Advocate For Respondents No. 1/ Claimant : Mr. Akhilesh Mishra, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment on Board 11/11/2025 1. The Claimant and Insurance Company have challenged the award passed by the IVth Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur (C.G.) in Claim Case No. 212/2016 dated 12.09.2018, whereby the learned Claims Tribunal has passed an award to the tune of Rs.8,20,587/- with interest @ 7.5% on account of injuries sustained by claimant, namely Subhash Tiwari. 2. MAC No. 50/2019 has been filed by the claimant for enhancement of compensation, inter alia on the ground that the learned Claims Tribunal has committed error of law while holding the claimant 50% negligent. 3. Mr. Akhilesh Mishra, learned counsel appearing for claimant would submit that the claimant- Subhash Tiwari was driver of Truck bearing registration No. CG 17/H-1624, whereas respondent- C.H. Someshwar Rao was driver of offending Truck bearing registration No. AP 35 W 2769. Mr. Mishra would submit that the driver of the offending truck 3 drove it rashly and negligently and dashed the truck of the claimant and there was no negligence on his part and, therefore, the learned Claims Tribunal committed error of law while fixing 50% negligence on the part of the claimant. He would further submit that the learned Claims Tribunal has granted meager amount on conventional heads. He would pray to enhance the compensation. 4. On the other hand, Mr. Dashrath Gupta, learned counsel appearing for Insurance Company would submit that the claimant was examined by the treating Doctor who issued disability certificate to the extent of 35% as rod was inserted in the right leg and the said certificate has been proved by AW-2 – Dr. A.A. Saify. It is argued that the learned Claims Tribunal has considered the disability of the claimant 100% and such finding is not proper. He would submit that the learned Claims Tribunal ought to have considered the functional disability 35%. He would pray to modify the award. 5. With regard to contention made by Mr. Mishra, it is argued that there was head-on collision between two trucks and the learned Claims Tribunal has dealt with the issue of contributory negligence in para- 19 of the impugned award. 6. Mr. Mishra would submit that the claimant was driver and on account of disability, he is no longer able to drive the vehicle, therefore, the learned Claims Tribunal rightly assessed the functional disability at 100% and passed award accordingly. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of learned Claims Tribunal with utmost circumspection. 8. With regard to contributory negligence, Claimant- Subhash Tiwari (AW- 1) has admitted that the offending truck was coming from front 4 direction and he had located said vehicle from 200 feets and he had sufficient time to control his vehicle. This witness further admitted that there was head-on collision between the two vehicles. 9. The learned Claims Tribunal has considered admission made by the claimant in his deposition and decided the issue of contributory negligence. Perusal of claimant’s evidence would reveal that the claimant saw the offending vehicle from distance of 200 feets, but failed to control his vehicle and thus, the learned Claims Tribunal rightly found the claimant 50% negligent and decided this issue accordingly. Therefore, contention made by Mr. Mishra cannot be accepted. 10. With regard to quantum of compensation, the learned Claims Tribunal has considered monthly notional income of the claimant at Rs.7,000/- per month; awarded 25% additional amount for future prospects; applied multiplier of 14 looking to the age of claimant 45 years and further considered the disability 100%. The learned Claims Tribunal further awarded sum of Rs.31,674.76 against the medical bills and treatment; Rs.7,500/- for attendant; Rs.20,000/- for special diet, conveyance and miscellaneous expenditure; Rs. 50,000/- for pain & suffering; Rs.42,000/- for loss of earning and Rs.20,000/- for future medical expense. 11. Perusal of the award would reveal that the learned Claims Tribunal has awarded meager amount for special diet, conveyance etc., therefore, the amount of compensation for special diet and conveyance is enhanced from Rs.20,000/- to Rs.40,000/-. 12. AW-2 Dr. A.A. Saify issued disability certificate to the extent of 35%. This witness stated that the claimant was not able to walk without help 5 of walker. Undisputedly, the claimant was a driver and on account of injuries sustained by him, he is no longer able to drive a truck and therefore, the learned Claims Tribunal assessed the functional disability to the extent of 100%. The Insurance Company could not rebut the evidence led by Dr. A.A. Saify (AW-2). It is also not denied by the Insurance Company that no injury was sustained by the claimant. The disability certificate- Ex. P/87 has been found valid by the learned Claims Tribunal. In absence of any contrary evidence, the findings recorded by the learned Claims Tribunal with regard to disability appear to be proper and reasonable. 13. Taking into consideration the above discussed fact, the appeal (MAC No. 50/2019) preferred by the claimant is partly allowed and amount of compensation for special diet and conveyance is enhanced by Rs.20,000/- which shall carry interest @ 7.5% from the date of application till its realization. The Insurance Company shall make payment of enhanced amount within a period of 60 days. 14. Accordingly, the appeal (MAC No. 623/2019) preferred by the Insurance Company is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge vatti