1 2026:CGHC:17534 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 54 of 2020 1 - Satyanarayan Markam S/o Kanak Ram Markam Aged About 28 Years R/o Village Padampur, Tahsil Nagari, District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh. (Claimant), ... Appellant (s) versus 1 - Pintu Markam S/o Subhau Ram Markam Aged About 21 Years R/o Shivnapali, Post Hatbhandari, Tahsil Raighar, District Navrangpur (Odisha) Chhattisgarh. (Driver), District : Nabarangapur Orissa 2 - Bishnu Kumar Sahu S/o Kunjal Sahu Aged About 38 Years R/o Village Jhatiyarpara, Post Hatbhandi, Tahsil Raighar, District Navrangapur Odisha. (Owner), District : Nabarangapur *, Orissa 3 - National Insurance Company Limited Branch Office, Through Branch Manager, Second Floor, Mobin Mahal G.E. Road, Raipur, Tahsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh. (Insurer), District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Appellant (s) : Mr. Praveen Dhurandhar, Advocate. For Respondent No.3 : Mr. GVK Rao, Advocate. (Single Bench) Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 16/04/2026 1. The appellant/claimant has preferred this Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short ‘the Act, 1988’) calling in question the legality, validity and correctness of the KRISHNA KUMAR BARVE Digitally signed by KRISHNA KUMAR BARVE Date: 2026.04.17 18:30:01 +0530 2 award dated 16.10.2019 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dhamtari (for short ‘the Claims Tribunal’) in Claim Case Nos.55/2019 by which liability to pay compensation of Rs.94,000/- has been fastened on the Insurance Company. In the present Appeal, the appellant/claimant has prayed for enhancement of the compensation amount. 2. Mr. Praveen Dhurandhar, learned counsel for the appellant/ claimant would submit that the Claims Tribunal was not justified in awarding meagre amount of Rs.94,000/- as compensation, which may be enhanced suitably. As such, the impugned award may be modified accordingly. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent No.3 would support the impugned award. 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. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and after going through the record, this Court is of the opinion that the Claims Tribunal was not justified in awarding an amount of Rs.94,000/- as compensation, inasmuch as in the accident the present appellant has suffered fracture on his right leg and right shoulder and treating doctor has also not been examined. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, looking to the injuries suffered by the appellant, it would be appropriate to enhance award amount. As such, the appellant will be entitled for the following compensation as computed by this Court:- 3 Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1. For grievous injury Rs.25,000/- Rs.50,000/- 2. Medical Bills Rs.54,000/- Rs.54,000/- 3. Pain and suffering Rs.15,000/- Rs.25,000/- 4. Assistance - Rs.10,000/- 5. Transportation - Rs.10,000/- 6. Future treatment - Rs.10,000/- Total Rs.94,000/- Rs.1,59,000/- 6. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of ₹94,000/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to ₹1,59,000/- . Hence, after deducting the amount of 94,000/- ₹ , the appellant is held to be entitled to an additional amount of ₹65,000/- . The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the amount of compensation within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a 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. 7. With the aforesaid modifications, the Appeal is disposed of. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Barve