1 2025:CGHC:17932 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 291 of 2020 1 - Israfil Ansari S/o Najir Ansari Aged About 38 Years Caste - Muslim, Occupation - Government Driver, R/o Ward No. 28, Bhatti Road, Ambikapur, District - Surguja Chhattisgarh. --- Appellant versus 1 - Surendra Kumar Bhuiya S/o Tilak Ram Bhuiya Aged About 42 Years Occupation Driver, R/o Village Pauradhar, Ward No. 4, Police Station Pauradhar Chowki, Kali Mandir, Post Pauradhar, District - Anuppur (M. P. ) (Driver Of The Offending Pickup C G - 15 - A - 5674 ) 2 - Shashikant Singh S/o Gajendra Narayan Singh, Aged About 49 Years Occupation Pickup Vehicle Owner, R/o Kitab Ghar Gandhi Stadium Complex Ambikapur, Police Station And Tahsil Ambikapur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh. (Owner Of The Offending Pickup C G - 15 - A - 5674 ). 3 - The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Through Branch Manager, The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Ambikapur, District - Surguja Chhattisgarh,. (Insurer Of The Offending Pickup C G - 15 - A - 5674 ). --- Respondent(s) For Appellant : Mr. Dashrath Kushwaha, Advocate For Respondent No.2 : Mr. Sanjeev Verma, Advocate For Respondent No.3 : Mr. T.K. Tiwari, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order On Board 21/04/2025 1. Claimant/appellant has filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short ‘the Act of 1988’) seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the learned Sixth Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ambikapur, Sarguja (for short ‘the Claims Tribunal’) vide award dated 29.11.2019 passed in BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN Digitally signed by BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN Date: 2025.04.28 16:46:57 +0530 2 Motor Accidents Claim Case No. 01/2019 thereby allowing application in part and awarding Rs.1,47,713/- as compensation in an injury case. 2. Facts relevant for disposal of this appeal are that on 24.03.2017 at about 8.45 in the night, applicant along with Sobrati and Kurban were standing near Ravi Petrol Pump, Ambikapur at that time, respondent No.1 by driving the pickup vehicle bearing registration No.C.G.-15-A- 5674 in a rash and negligent manner dashed them and caused accident. Due to the said accident, the bone below the knee and above the foot was broken and he also suffered injuries on other parts of body. Appellant was immediately taken to the District Hospital, Ambikapur and thereafter he was taken to Agrasen Hospital, Raipur for proper treatment and admitted from 25.03.2017 to 01.04.2017, where his right leg was operated and iron rod was implanted. 3. Appellant filed an application under Section 166 of the Act of 1988 seeking total compensation of Rs.15,51,000/- pleading therein that he is a government servant working as driver in CREDA department and getting monthly salary of Rs.21,684/-. Due to the said accident, appellant could not go to his work for three months due to which salary of three months i.e. Rs.65,000/- has been deducted from his salary. Claimant has also sought compensation under all other heads as are available to him like medical expenses, special diet, future medical expenses, pain and sufferings etc. 4. Non-applicant No.2 owner of offending vehicle, submitted reply and resisted the claim. The happening of accident with the offending vehicle was denied. It was pleaded that offending vehicle was duly insured with respondent No.3 and the vehicle was being driven by the 3 respondent No.1 who was having valid driving licence to drive the vehicle. 5. Non-applicant No.3-Insurer of offending vehicle, submitted reply to claim application and while denying the pleadings made therein has pleaded that the accident occurred due to the collision between two vehicles i.e. offending pick-up and the motorcycle. The motor cycle was being driven in breach of condition of insurance policy. The claim application was filed based on false facts and grounds in order to get compensation. Non-applicant No.1-driver was not having valid and effective driving license, there was breach of conditions of insurance policy, hence, insurance company is not liable to pay any amount of compensation. 6. Upon appreciation of pleadings and evidence placed on record by respective parties, the learned Claims Tribunal held that accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of driver of offending vehicle by non-applicant No.1, due to which the appellant suffered injuries. Breach of Policy condition was not found to be proved. Tribunal allowed application in part, awarded total compensation of Rs.1,47,713/- along with interest @ 7% per annum, fastened liability upon non-applicant No.3-Insurance Company to pay the amount of compensation. 7. Learned counsel for appellant submits that Tribunal erred in awarding meager amount of compensation overlooking the nature of injuries suffered. He also contended that amount of compensation under the head of conveyance and special diet is also on lower side. Learned Claims Tribunal has failed to consider the documents (Ex.P-36) and 4 also failed to award the loss of income during laid down period. The learned Claims Tribunal has also failed to award suitable compensation towards the injury suffered by appellant. He prays that amount of compensation be suitably enhanced. 8. Learned counsel for respective respondents supports the impugned award and would submit that the amount of compensation awarded by learned Claims Tribunal in the facts and circumstances of the case and the evidence available on record, is just and proper, which does not call for any interference. 9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 10. So far as the submission of learned counsel for appellant that learned Claims Tribunal failed to award any amount towards loss of income during the laid down period is concerned, it is not in dispute that due the accident, appellant suffered grievous injuries on his right leg. It is also not in dispute that appellant is a government servant working as driver in CREDA and was getting monthly salary of Rs.21,684/-. Appellant in the claim application and the evidence has stated that due to the accident, his right leg below the knee and above the foot was broken, due to which he could not go to the work and perform his duties for about three months consequently, a sum of Rs.65,000/- was deducted from his salary. In support of his claim, appellant has placed on record the certificate (Ex.P-36) issued by Account Assistant, CREDA, Regional Office, Ambikapur. From perusal of certificate Ex.P. 36, it appears that appellant was not able to attend his work from 25/03/2017 to 25/08/2017 and was on medical and earned leave during the said period. Hence, it is clear that appellant availed the 5 facility of medical and earned leave during the said period, which could have been availed by the appellant for other exigency in his life. Therefore, appellant is entitled for salary of five months (Rs.21684 x 5 = Rs. 1,08,420.00). It is ordered accordingly. 11. So far as the submission of learned counsel for appellant that learned Claims Tribunal has failed to award any amount towards the grievous injury suffered by appellant, perusal of the impugned award would show that he learned Claims Tribunal though had recorded a finding that appellant suffered grievous injuries, however, no amount of compensation is awarded under that head. The nature of grievous injury suffered by appellant will have its impact over the whole life of appellant, though the appellant failed to prove the permanent disability due to said injury, however, considering the nature of injury suffered I find it appropriate to award Rs.25,000/- towards the grievous injuries suffered by him. It is ordered accordingly. 12. The amount of compensation under the head of special diet awarded of Rs.5,000/- is also on lower side, looking to the nature of injury I find it appropriate to award Rs.10,000/- towards special diet. It is ordered accordingly. The amount of Rs.1,06,713/- towards treatment, Rs.3000/- for attendant, Rs.8000/- towards conveyance and Rs.25,000/- towards pains and suffering awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal is just and proper in the facts of the case, which does not call for any interference. 13. On the basis of above, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is recomputed as under :- 6 S.N. Head Amount. 1. Loss of income of five months (during laid down period) : Rs.1,08,420.00 2. For treatment : Rs.1,06,713.00 3. For attendant : Rs. 3,000.00 4. For Transportation : Rs. 8000.00 5. For special diet : Rs. 10,000.00 6. For pain and suffering : Rs. 25,000.00 7. For grievous injuries : Rs. 25,000.00 Total Compensation : Rs.2,86,133.00 14. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part. The appellant shall be entitled for total compensation of Rs.2,86,133.00. Any amount paid to the appellant as compensation as per award shall be adjusted. Enhanced amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 7% per annum from the date of filing of application till its realization. 15. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part and the award impugned stands modified to the extent indicated above. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Balram