1 2025:CGHC:20220 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 653 of 2021  Sanjay Sahu S/o Satyadev Sahu Aged About 21 Years R/o Near Kali Mandir, Tifra, Police Station Sirgitti, District -Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh), District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant(s) versus 1. Mangal Das Manikpuri S/o Kirtan Aged About 32 Years R/o Village Rawan Daihan Para, Ward No. 14, Police Station Kasdol, District Balodabazar (Chhattisgarh) ................ (Driver Of Vehicle No. Cg-4/lf/9012, District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh 2. Sandeep Sharma S/o B.P. Sharma Aged About 43 Years R/o Golden Home No. 1, Khamhardih, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) ................ (Owner Of Vehicle No. Cg-4/lf/9012, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3. United India Insurance Company Ltd. Through Branch Manager, Zone Office 2nd Floor, Gurukripa Tower, In Front Of Ambar Auto Mobiles, Vyaparvihar, Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) ................ (Insurer Of Vehicle No. Cg-4/lf/9012, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Appellant : Mr. Akash Shrivastava, Adv. For Respondents No. 1 and 2 : Mr. Jasraj Singh Bhatia, Adv. on behalf of Mr. D.L. Dewangan, Adv. For Respondent No. 3 : Mr. Anupam Dubey, Adv. Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment On Board 02-05-2025 1) The appellant has preferred this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for enhancement of compensation against the award passed by the 8th Additional Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur (C.G.) in Claim Case No. 657/2018 dated 24.03.2021, whereby the learned 2 Tribunal has awarded compensation to the tune of Rs. 75,159/- with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of application till its realization. 2) Learned counsel for the appellant submits that on the fateful day of 25.09.2017, near Kasdol, respondent No. 1 driving the offending vehicle bearing registration No. CG-04-LF-9012 rashly and negligently hit the appellant, who sustained a fracture in his left elbow. He further submits that the appellant remained hospitalized for a period of four days but the learned Tribunal has not assessed the compensation under the heads of pain and suffering, transportation expenses and special diet. He contends that only Rs. 3,000/- for pain and suffering has been awarded, which appears to be on the lower side. He prays to enhance the amount of compensation. 3) On the other hand, learned counsels appearing for respondents would oppose. They submit that the learned Tribunal has passed a just and proper award in favor of the claimant. They further submit that the claimant remained hospitalized for a period of four days at Baloda- Bazar which is only 25-30 km away from Kasdol, therefore, there was no reason for the Tribunal to grant compensation for transportation. They pray that this appeal deserves to be dismissed. 4) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5) Perusal of the record would make it clear that the appellant sustained a fracture of his left elbow in the accident, which occurred on 25.09.2017 near Kasdol. The learned Tribunal decided issues of contributory negligence and breach of Insurance Policy in negative. The Insurance Company has not challenged the findings recorded by the learned Tribunal and thus, those findings attained finality. 6) A perusal of the award would further show that the appellant suffered a 3 fracture of the left elbow. The learned Tribunal has awarded compensation under the heads of medical expenses as well as the loss of income for a period of three months but with regard to the pain and suffering only Rs. 3,000/- has been awarded which appears to be on the lower side. Further, the Tribunal has not awarded compensation for special diet and transportation expenses. 7) Taking into consideration the above-discussed facts, the amount of compensation under the head of pain and suffering is hereby enhanced from Rs. 3,000/- to Rs. 10,000/-. Further, the claimant would be entitled to receive a sum of Rs. 3,000/- for special diet and Rs. 2,000/- for transportation expenses. Thus, in total, the appellant would be entitled to receive an additional compensation of Rs. 12,000/- from the Insurance Company. Rest of the terms of the award shall remain intact. 8) Accordingly, the appeal stands partly allowed. The Insurance Company is directed to make payment of the additional compensation of Rs. 12,000/- to the appellant in addition to the amount awarded by the Tribunal and the same shall not carry interest if paid within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, otherwise the interest of 8 % p.a. would be payable. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE Ajinkya