1 2025:CGHC:50260 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 729 of 2020  Amardas Mahant S/o Harihardas Mahant Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Arda, Tahsil Katghora, District Korba, Chhattisgarh, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant(s) versus 1. Inderpreet Singh S/o Santokh Singh Aged About 25 Years R/o Junapara, Batari, Police Station Dipka, District Korba, Chhattisgarh ( Driver And Owner Of Alleged Offending Vehicle Maruti Baleno Alfa Car Bearing Registration No. Cg 12 Aq- 9977 ), District : Korba, Chhattisgarh 2. Ifco Tokiyo General Insruance Company Limited Through Divisional, First Floor Galaxy Heights, Near Icici Bank, Beside Sanjay Apartment, Vyapar Vihar, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ( Insurer Of Alleged Offending Vehicle Maruti Baleno Alfa Car Bearing Registration No. Cg 12aq-9977 ), District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Appellant : Mr. Gurudev I. Sharan, Advocate For Respondent No. 2/ : Ms. Shristi Attal, Advocate holding the brief of Insurance company Mr. Vaibhav Shukla, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 09.10 .2025 1. Heard on admission. 2. The appellant/injured has filed this appeal for enhancement of compensation against the award passed by the learned Second Additional Motor Accidents Tribunal, Katghora, District Korba, in Claim Case No. 168/2017 dated 20.12.2019, whereby the learned Tribunal has passed an award to the tune of Rs. 3,24,639/- with interest at the rate of 7% per SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Digitally signed by SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Date: 2025.10.10 12:49:06 +0530 2 annum from date of application. 3. The facts in brief are that on the intervening night of 22.11.2016 and 23.11.2016 at Jhabar Main Road Dipka, when the appellant/injured was going to his work place, driver of Maruti Baleno Alpha Car bearing registration No. C.G. 12 AQ 9977 driving it rashly and negligently hit the claimant, consequently, he sustained serious injuries including fracture of femur bone of right leg. The claimant pleaded that at the time of accident his age was 39 years and he was working as Security Guard. He claimed a sum of Rs. 52,37,280/-. 4. Insurance company filed reply and denied claim averments. The learned Tribunal framed issues, parties led evidence and the learned Tribunal passed award. 5. Mr. Gurudev I. Sharan, Advocate appearing for the appellant/injured would argue that the learned Tribunal has awarded meager amount on conventional heads. He would further submit that for loss of earning the learned Tribunal has not considered age and income of the injured. He would also submit that on other heads, the learned Tribunal has awarded meager amount. He would pray to enhance the compensation. 6. On the other hand, Ms. Shristi Attal, Advocate appearing for respondent No. 2/Insurance company would argue that medical bills to the tune of Rs. 1,64,639/- was honoured by the learned Tribunal. She would further submit that the learned Tribunal further awarded Rs. 30,000/- for mental agony, Rs. 10,000/- for loss of earning as claimant could not worked for one and half months, Rs. 10,000/- for conveyance and Rs. 20,000/- for future medical expenses. She would also submit that the learned Tribunal has awarded just and proper compensation. She would submit that the instant appeal deserves to be dismissed. 3 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 8. Perusal of the record would show that the claimants sustained injuries in motor accident and there was fracture of femur bone of right leg, he was operated by the Doctor and this fact was proved by AW/3 Dr. Ghyanshyam Diwan, who deposed that there was fracture of Femur bone of right hand and steel rod was inserted. A disability certificate was also issued by the said Doctor to the extent of 38.76%. He further stated that on account of injury sustained over right leg, the appellant had suffered disability to the extent of 44% and thus, the total disability was 82.27%. 9. The learned Tribunal has not considered disability certificate Ex. P/38 on the ground that it was not issued by the Medical Board rather it was an opinion of orthopaedic surgeon. I do not find any good ground to interfere with the findings recorded by the learned Tribunal in this regard. 10. With regard to grant of compensation, the learned Tribunal has honoured medical bills submitted by the claimant and further award Rs. 30,000/- for attendant, Rs. 50,000/- for pain and suffering, Rs. 30,000/- for mental agony, Rs. 10,000/- for loss of earning, Rs. 10,000/- for conveyance and Rs. 20,000/- for future medical expenses, and thus, the learned Tribunal has awarded Rs. 3,24,639/- with interest at the rate of 7%. I do not find any scope for enhancement. Accordingly, this appeal fails and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge $iddhant