1 2025:CGHC:51838 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 372 of 2024  United India Insurance Company Limited Through Its Branch Manager, Branch - Office, Rajnandgaon, Distt - Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. (Non-Applicant No. 2) ... Appellant(s) versus 1. Motilal Sahu S/o Late Sukhiram Sahu Aged About 50 Years Through Smt. Sunita Shau, W/o Motilal Sahu, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Vill - Dhanora, Tah - Gurur, Distt - Balod, Chhattisgarh. (Applicant) 2. Nikunj Patel S/o Mahendra Bhai Patel Aged About 31 Years R/o Ward No. 2 Marapara, Balod, P.S. - Balod, Distt - Balod, Chhattisgarh. (Owner - Driver) (Non - Applicant No. 1) ... Respondent(s) For Appellant : Mr. Dashrath Gupta, Advocate For Respondent No. 1 : Mr. Aditya Shrivastava, Advocate on behalf of Mr. B.P. Singh, Advocate For Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Mayank Chandrakar, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment On Board 17-10-2025 1) The appellant–Insurance Company has filed this appeal challenging the award passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Balod (C.G.) in Claim Case No. 48/2018 dated 7.8.2023 whereby Claims Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. Digitally signed by AJINKYA PANSARE Date: 2025.10.17 14:30:33 +0530 2 20,00,170/- with interest @ 9% in favor of the claimant/injured on account of injuries sustained by him. 2) Facts of the present case are that on 28.10.2017 at about 7:00 p.m., the claimant, namely, Motilal Sahu was returning to Village Dhanora on bicycle. Respondent No. 1 while driving the offending motorcycle bearing registration No. CG-07-AP-0955 rashly and negligently, dashed Motilal Sahu. In the accident, he sustained severe injuries over head and other body parts. Claimant was admitted to Govt. Hospital, Gurur and later on, was referred to Narayana Hospital, Raipur. Claimant moved a claim application U/s 166 of MV Act, 1988 claiming compensation to the tune of Rs. 25,60,000/-. Driver-cum-owner of offending motorcycle and Insurance Company filed reply and denied the averments made in claim application. Claims Tribunal framed issues ; parties led evidence and Claims Tribunal passed the award. 3) Learned counsel for the Insurance Company submits that Claims Tribunal has computed the compensation treating the disability of the claimant to be 100%, which is illegal as the claimant failed to prove the fact he suffered 100% disability in the accident. He further submits that Claims Tribunal has awarded Rs. 5,76,250/- against the medical bills submitted by the claimant without examining the treating medical practitioner in this regard. He prays to modify the award accordingly. 4) On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respective respondents would oppose. They submit that Dr. Mithun Dutta, 3 Psychologist [AW/3] has been examined to prove the injuries and disability suffered by the claimant. They further submit that due to the accident, claimant has lost his memory and is suffering from Organic Brain Syndrome and certificate [Ex. P/120] in this regard was issued on 16.4.2018 by Dr. Mithun Dutta. They contend that claimant submitted medical bills and same have been honored by the Claims Tribunal and as there was loss of memory, Claims Tribunal has assessed the loss of earning treating disability to the extent of 100%. They further contend that under conventional heads, Claims Tribunal has awarded meager amounts and the award requires recomputation. They pray that this appeal deserves to be dismissed. 5) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 6) According to the medical documents, the claimant suffered head injury resulting into loss of memory. The claimant remained hospitalized at Narayana Hospital, Raipur for considerable period. He also underwent treatment under Dr. Mithun Dutta, Psychlogist. A certificate [Ex. P/120] has been issued by Dr. Mithun Dutta on 16.4.2018 certifying that the claimant is suffering from Organic Brain Syndrome and he will require regular treatment and follow- up. Admittedly, Insurance Company could not controvert the evidence of Dr. Dutta. 7) Present is a case where the claimant lost his memory and is suffering from Organic Brain Syndrome. As deposed by Dr. Mithun 4 Dutta, he would require regular treatment and follow-up, therefore Claims Tribunal has rightly assessed the disability to the extent of 100%. Accordingly, the contention made by Mr. Gupta cannot be accepted. 8) With regard to medical bills, the claimant has placed on record medical bills [Ex.P/1 to P/101] and Claims Tribunal has honored the same looking into the physical and mental condition of the claimant. Insurance Company failed to lead evidence to falsify those medical bills, thus contention made by Mr. Gupta cannot be accepted. 9) In view of the above, the appeal preferred by the Insurance Company being devoid of merits, stands dismissed. No order as to cost(s). Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE A j i n k y a