Sampat Narayan Singh v. Ashok Kumar Sao & Ors
Case Details
1 Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2025:CGHC:28216 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1009 of 2017 1 - Sampat Narayan Singh S/o Thakur Singh, Aged About 55 Years R/o Thakur Industries Ganesh Market, Supela, Bhilai, P. S. Supela, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh., Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant(s) versus 1 - Ashok Kumar Sao S/o Ganeshi Sao, Aged About 20 Years R/o Bhajirganj Gaya Bihar, Presently R/o Dr. Gopal Road, P. S. Lal Kalkatta West Bengal.......Driver Of Vehcle Truck No. W. B. 41 F - 2072., West Bengal. 2 - Anup Kumar S/o Chandrashekhar Yadav, R/o 46/296, Behla Central Government Quarter, Pranshi Kalkatta West Bengal......Owner Of Vehicle Truck No. W. B. 41 F - 2072., District : Kolkata, West Bengal. 3 - Divisional Manager, Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited, G. E. Plaza Airport Road Yarwada Pune Maharashtra Through Branch Office Branch Manager, Bajaj Allianz General Insurance 2 Company Limited, Infront Of Dr. Dhillan Complex, Gurudwara Station Road, Durg Chhattisgarh......Insurer Of Vehicle Truck No. W. B. 41f - 2072., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Appellant(s)
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Vikas Shrivastava, Advocate. For Respondent(s) No. 1 : None. & 2 For Respondent(s) No. 3 : Ms. Shristi Upadhyay, Advocate. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad 26/06/2025 Order on Board 1. This appeal arises out of the award dated 21.12.2016 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Durg, District-Durg (C.G.), in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 04/2015 (“Sampat Narayan Singh Vs. Ashok Kumar Sao & Ors.”) awarding a compensation of Rs. 1,36,342/- with interest @ 6% per annum, in favour of the appellant/claimant for his irreparable loss. 2. Brief facts of the case, is that, on 08.05.2012 at about 7:00 p.m., the appellant was returning home from his workplace at Thakur Industries, Ganesh Market, Supela, Bhilai, on his motorcycle. When he reached near Chandra Mourya Talkies, the offending vehicle bearing registration No. WB41/G-2072, coming from G.E. Road and being driven in a rash and negligent manner, hit the 3 appellant from behind. As a result, the appellant sustained grievous injuries, including a fracture on his left leg, and was immediately referred to Sector- 9 Hospital, where he remained admitted for 8 days and subsequently continued treatment under a private doctor. At the time of the incident, the offending truck was being driven by non-applicant No.1 (Driver), owned by non- applicant No.2 (Owner) and insured with non-applicant No.3 (Bajaj General Insurance Company Limited). The accident was reported to Police Station- Supela and Crime No. 312/2012 was registered against non-applicant No.1 (Driver) for offences punishable under Sections 279, 337 and 338 of the Indian Penal Code for rash and negligent driving. The Learned Claims Tribunal upon considering the evidence and material available on record passed an award in favour of the appellant and granted compensation to the tune of Rs. 1,36,342/- directing non- applicant No.3 (Insurance Company) to pay the awarded amount. 3. In the award passed by the Tribunal, the appellant has produced a permanent disability certificate vide Ex. P-33 to the extent of 15% issued by the Medical Officer, therefore, it is not proved that the appellant sustained permanent disability in the said accident, though he has suffered grievous injuries. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs 64,800/- towards loss of income during treatment, Rs 40,452/- towards expenses in treatment, Rs. 4 5,000/- towards attendant, Rs. 15,000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs. 6,000 towards loss during treatment & Rs. & Rs. 5,000/- towards special diet. Thus, a total compensation of Rs. 1,36,342/- has been awarded in favor of the appellant. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he was admitted in the hospital for about one month and underwent treatment and suffered physical and mental agony for a long time. No compensation has been given to him for future inconvenience. He further submits that the compensation awarded under other heads is also on lower side and needs to be enhanced. Hence, this appeal may be allowed by enhancing the compensation amount suitably. 5. On the other hand, it has argued on behalf of the counsel for respondent No. 3 that in the facts and circumstances of case, the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is just and proper and requires no further enhancement. 6. None for respondent Nos. 1 & 2. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 8. In a motor accident claim case, what is important is that, the compensation to be awarded by the Courts/Tribunals should be just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the case. It should neither be a meager amount of compensation, 5 nor a Bonanza. 9. Now this Court shall examine as to whether the compensation of awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the given facts and circumstances of the case. 10. From the perusal of the entire material available on record, it is clear that the appellant was admitted in the hospital for about one month and underwent treatment. Due to the fracture on the leg of the appellant, he has certainly suffered physical and mental agony for a long period of time. Keeping in view the period of hospitalization and the future inconvenience, it would be justified to enhanced the award amount passed by the Tribunal in favor of the appellant. 11. Accordingly, looking to the entire above facts, an additional amount of Rs. 5,000/- towards attendant, Rs. 5,000/- towards special diet and Rs. 6,000/- towards loss of income, total Rs. 16,000/- is hereby enhanced.
Decision
12. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. The claimant shall be entitled to Rs. 16,000/- in addition to what is already awarded by the claims Tribunal. The enhanced amount will carry interest @ 6% from the date of enhancement of the award till its realization. The impugned award stands modified to the above extent and rest of the conditions shall remain intact. 6 13. The Registry is further directed to communicate the claimants in writing about “the enhanced amount” in this appeal as against the award made by the Tribunal below. The said communication be made in Hindi (Deonagri) language and the help of paralegal workers may be availed with a co-ordination of Secretary, State Legal Services Authority and the DLSA of the concerned area where the claimants resides. SD/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat