1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 350 of 2020 1 - Melaram Varma S/o Sadanand Aged About 60 Years R/o Village- Badekoni, Police Station- Koni, Tahsil And District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. (Applicant), District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus 1 - Saibaran @ Vicky S/o Terasram R/o Village And Post Office- Kosla, Tahsil- Pamgarh, District- Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh. (Driver Of The Vehicle Motor Cycle No. C.G. 04 / K.R. 0695), District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh 2 - Surendra Kumar Thakur S/o Ramlal Thakur R/o- Balarroad, Near Bandha Talab, Kasdol, Post Office- Kasdol, District- Balodabazar, Chhattisgarh., District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh 3 - United India Insurance Company Limited Through- Branch Manager, Branch Office- Gurukripa Tower, Vyapara Vihar Road Bilaspur, Tahsil And District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. (Non-Applicants), District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Appellant : Mr. Anand Kesharwani, Advocate For Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Govind Dewangan, Advocate For Respondent No. 3 : Mr. Pravesh Sahu, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput, Order on Board 29.08.2025 1) This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short MV Act) has been filed by the appellant/claimant, being aggrieved by the award dated 02.11.2019 passed by the 2nd Upper Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur (C.G.) (for short ‘learned Tribunal’) in Claim Case No. 680/2017. 2) By the impugned award, the learned Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs. 1,87,781/- to the appellant/claimant, on account of the injuries sustained HIFZURRAHMAN ANSARI Digitally signed by HIFZURRAHMAN ANSARI Date: 2025.09.11 10:43:02 +0530 2 by the appellant in an accident that took place on 22.03.2017 by rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle (Motorcycle) bearing Registration No. CG-04-KR-0695 by respondent No.1, owned by respondent No.2 and insured with respondent No.3/Insurance company. As a result of the said accident, the appellant suffered severe injuries and remained in hospital for a considerable period of time. 3) The respondent No. 1 filed his written statement and denied the averments of the fact. Respondent No. 2 remained ex parte before the learned tribunal and did not file the reply. Respondent No.3 /Insurance company in usual course, denied the averments of the claim application and pleaded that the driver of the offending vehicle did not have valid and effective driving licence and there is a violation of terms and conditions of insurance policy. 4) On the basis of the above pleadings, the learned Tribunal has framed 5 issues and after appreciating the material available on record decided the same in favour of the appellant/claimant and awarded in the following manner- 1. Medical Expenses 1,19,781/- 2. Loss of Income 18,000/- 3. Physical and Mental Agony 20,000/- 4. Nutritious Diet 10,000/- 5. Transportation Expenses 10,000/- 6. Attendant Expenses 10,000/- Total- Rs. 1,87,781/- 5) Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants submits that the amount of compensation is on the lower side. Hence, suitable enhancement may be made by this Court. 3 6) Learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 submits that he has not pressing the cross-objection filed by him. 7) In view of above, the cross-objection filed by the respondent No. 2 is dismissed as not pressed and the default pointed out by the registry is ignored. 8) Learned counsels for the respondent No.3 supports the award and submits that in view of evidence available on record and findings of the learned Tribunal is justified and just compensation has been awarded. 9) I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions and perused the records. 10) The learned Tribunal, upon due consideration of the evidence adduced and the nature of injuries sustained by the appellant, has awarded just and reasonable compensation. The award takes into account the medical expenses, loss of income, pain and suffering, as well as other expenses incurred by the appellant. 11) This Court finds that the compensation so awarded is fair, proper, and commensurate with the extent of injuries and suffering caused to the appellant. No ground is made out warranting interference by this Court in the award passed by the learned Tribunal. 12) Accordingly, the appeal fails and is dismissed. The impugned award of the learned Tribunal is hereby affirmed. Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge H.Ansari