1 2025:CGHC:52652 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 916 of 2023 Santosh Kumar Yadav S/o Deenaram Yadav, Aged About 38 Years Resident Village- Dhandhani, Thana- Balaodabazar Tahsil And District- Balaodabazar (Chhattisgarh). ... Appellant/Claimant versus 1 - Jitendra Singh Thakur S/o Late Manharan Singh Thakur Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Kirari, (Masturi), Thana Masturi And Tahsil Masturi, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh (Owner Cum Driver Of The Offending Vehicle Auto No. C.G. 10/A.R./ 9329) 2 - The Oriental Insurance Company Limited Through Branch Manager, Branch Office, Rama Trade Center, In Front Of Rajeev Plaza Bilaspur, Thana Civil Line, Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh (Insurer Of The Offending Vehicle Auto No. C.G.10/A.R./9320) ... Respondent(s) For Appellant : Mr. A.L. Singroul, Advocate For Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Abhishek Vinod Deshmukh, Advocate 2 SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment On Board 29.10.2025 1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “Act of 1988”) has been preferred by the appellant/claimant seeking enhancement of amount of compensation, challenging the impugned award dated 13/03/2023 passed by learned 10th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) in Claim Case No. 442/2021, whereby learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs. 1,62,209/- to the appellant/claimant for the injuries suffered by him. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant/claimant would submit that the appellant/claimant has suffered greivous injuries in various parts of his body and also suffered fracture in his leg and a rod was implanted in surgery due to which he was not able to work for six months, however, the Claims Tribunal has only granted loss of income for two months assessing the monthly income of the appellant/claimant as Rs. 10,300/- whereas it should be Rs. 11,000/-, as such, the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal may suitably be enhanced. 3. Learned counsel for respondent No. 2 would support the impugned award and submit that the compensation 3 awarded by learned Claims Tribunal is just and proper and does not warrant any interference by this Court. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection. 5. A careful perusal of the record would show that the Claims Tribunal has assessed the monthly income of the deceased to be Rs.10,300/-, however, in the opinion of this Court, his monthly income should be Rs. 11,000/- and taking consideration of the statement of Dr. Digvijay Singh (A.W.-2) as well as the injuries suffered by the deceased, his loss of income ought to have been taken for 6 months. 6. Thus, in light of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is computing the compensation as below:- Sr. No . Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1. Loss of Income Rs. 10,300 x 2 = Rs. 20,600/- Rs. 11,000/- x 6 = Rs. 66,000/- 2. Medical Expenses Rs. 1,28,609/- Rs. 1,28,609/- 3. Transportation Rs. 3,000/- Rs. 5,000/- 4. Special Diet Rs. 2,000/- Rs. 5,000/- 5. Pain and Suffering Rs. 5,000/- Rs. 25,000/- 6. Loss of Amenities NIL Rs. 10,000/- 7. Attendant’s fees Rs. 3,000/- Rs. 5,000/- 8. Future medical NIL Rs. 10,000/- 4 expenses 9. Loss of Matrimonial life NIL Rs. 30,000/- Total Rs. 1,62,209/- Rs. 2,84,609/- 7. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs. 1,62,209/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 2,84,609/-. Hence, the appellant is held entitled for an additional amount of Rs. 1,22,400/-. Respondent No. 2 is directed to deposit the amount of compensation as enhanced by this Court within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of claim application before the Tribunal i.e. 28/01/2021 till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. 8. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed in part and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Harneet