Page No.1 of 4 IN MAC-768-2023 2025:CGHC:55127 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 768 of 2023 [Arising out of award dt. 10.02.2023, passed in Claim Case No.129/2020 (Venktesh Kashyap v. Kuleshwar Kol and others) by the 8th Addl. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur (CG)] Venktesh Kashyap S/o Dhruv Kumar Sashyap Aged About 16 Years Through Natural Guardian Father Dhruv Kumar Kashyap R/o Block Colony, Ward, No. 1 Takhatpur, Police Station Takhatpur, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant Versus 1 - Kuleshwar Kol S/o Madanlal Kol Aged About 27 Years R/o Village Daukapa Police Station And Tahsil Jarahagaon, District Mungeli Chhattisgarh. (Driver Of Truck Bearing No. Cg-10/k- 4014) 2 - Prahlad Agrawal S/o Rambilas Agrawal, Main Road Takhatpur, Police Station Takhatpur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. (Woner Of Truck Bearing No. Cg-10/k-4014) 3 - The New India Insurance Company Ltd. Through Branch Manager Branch Office Rama Trade Centre, In Front Of Rajeev Plaza, Near Bus Stand Bilaspur, Police Station City Kotwali, Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. (Insurance Company Of Truck Bearing No. C.G-10/k- 4014) ... Respondents [Cause-title taken from Case Information System (CIS)] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Appellant : Mr. Vipin Singh Thakur, Advocate For Respondent No.3 : Mr. Deepak Gupta, Advocate ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Single Bench: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal (Order on Board) 12.11.2025 SAIFAN KHAN Digitally signed by SAIFAN KHAN Page No.2 of 4 IN MAC-768-2023 1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short the “Act of 1988”) has been preferred by the appellant/claimant seeking enhancement of amount of compensation, challenging the impugned award dt. 10.02.2023, passed in Claim Case No.129/2020 (Venktesh Kashyap v. Kuleshwar Kol and others) by the 8th Addl. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur (CG), whereby learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.1,15,635/- as compensation for the injuries sustained by the appellant in the accident occurred on 11.06.2019. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that learned Claims Tribunal has erred in awarding less amount of compensation in the facts of the case. In the present case, the appellant suffered injuries on knee and foot of left leg and he remained hospitalized from 12.06.2019 to 16.06.2019 and, therefore, the learned Claims Tribunal has erred in awarding less amount of compensation on other conventional heads i.e. pain and suffering, transportation, special diet, attendant charge etc., which may also be enhanced suitably. Further, the learned Claims Tribunal has not awarded any amount under the heads of loss of amenities and future medical treatment. Therefore, the instant appeal be allowed and the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal may suitably be enhanced. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent would submit that the appellant have failed to prove nature of occupation and income by Page No.3 of 4 IN MAC-768-2023 producing clinching and admissible piece of evidence, hence, the amount of compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is just and proper which does not call for any interference. 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. In the case at hand, since the appellant, who is aged about 13 years and a student, has suffered injuries on knee and foot of left leg and he remained hospitalized from 12.06.2019 to 16.06.2019, therefore, it appears that the learned Claims Tribunal has erred in not awarding proper compensation to the appellant under other conventional heads i.e. pain and suffering, transportation, special diet etc. and, even, no amount under the heads of loss of amenities and future medical treatment has been awarded. Thus, in the considered opinion of this Court, the amount of compensation awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal is liable to be enhanced. 6. Thus, in light of the aforesaid discussion and in light of the judgments of the Supreme Court rendered in the matters of National Insurance Company Ltd. V. Pranay Sethi 1, Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Ors2 and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors 3 , this Court is computing the compensation as below:- 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 Page No.4 of 4 IN MAC-768-2023 Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1. Medical Expenses (+) Rs.77,632/- (+) Rs.77,632/- 2. Transportation (+) Rs.3,000/- (+) Rs.10,000/- 3. Pain and suffering (+) Rs.10,000/- (+) Rs.25,000/- 4. Special Diet (+) Rs.10,000/- (+) Rs.25,000/- 5. Attendant Charge (+) Rs.15,000/- (+) Rs.25,000/- 6. Future Medical Treatment NIL (+) Rs.25,000/- 7. Loss of amenities NIL (+) Rs.25,000/- Total Rs.1,15,632/- Rs.2,12,632/- 7. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs.1,15,632/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.2,12,632/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs.1,15,632/-, the appellant is held entitled for an additional amount of Rs.97,000/-. The concerned respondent 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 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 s@if