Allowed

Subho Bai v. Smt. Aasha Devi and Ors.

Chhattisgarh HC20 Jun 2012MAC/339/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Chhattisgarh High Court enhanced compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal for a claimant with 30% permanent disability. The court held the original sum was low and directed the insurer to deposit an additional Rs. 15,000.

What did the court decide?

The appeal allowed in part; claimant awarded further Rs. 15,000 inclusive of interest in addition to the Tribunal's award of Rs. 35,000; Respondent No. 3 granted three months to deposit the sum before

Subho Bai Vs Smt. Aasha Devi and Ors. — Motor Accident Claims | Chhattisgarh HC (2012)

¶1

¶2

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH

¶3

CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J.

¶4

Misc. Appeal (C) No. 339 of 2011

¶5

¶6

Appellant	Subho Bai, w/o Dev Singh aged about 40 years, r/o village Khursipar, Kachghodo, P.S. Ambagarh, Chowki, district>Rajnandgaon C.G. ,'5 VERSUS
Respondents	Smt. Aasha Devi, w/o Amar Das Gayakwad, ag^d about 48 years, (vehicle owner)3r/o village Kotra, P.S. Ambagarh, Chowki.
	Homan Das Markande, s/o Bhanuram Markande, aged about 24 years, (driver) r/o village Bharritola, P.S. Ambagarh, Chowki.
	New India Insurance Company, Branch Kamthi Line, Rajnandgaon, at present New India Insurance Company Limited, Divisional Office First Floor Thakkar Chamber, G.E. Road, Power House, Bhilai, district Durg C.G.

¶7

Memo of appeal under Section 173^of MQtor Vehicle Act

¶8

Present: Shri V.K. Sharma, counsel for the appellant. Shri Raj Awasthi, counsel for respondent No.3.

¶9

ORDER

¶10

^th (20r"June,2012)

¶11

The following order of the Court was passed by

RajeevGupta, C.J.

.<br>

MAC.No. 339 of 2011

Appellant/ claimant Subho Bai is seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, 'the Rajnandgaon (for short Tribunal') vide award dated 11.10.2010, passed in Claim Case No. 146/2007.

¶16

As against the compensation of Rs. 13,65,0007- claimed by the appellant/claimant, by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for the injuries sustained by her in the motor accident on 05.06.2006, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.35,000/- as compensation to thfe claimant along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment.

¶17

The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led <»SL before it held the New India Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Tractor-Trolley bearing registratjon Nos.CG-08-0-0322 and C.G.-08-G-2203, respectively liable to pay compensation to the claimant.

¶18

As the insurer of the above offending vehicle Tractor-Trolley has not filed any appeal against the impugned award challenging the above finding recorded by the Tribunal, the same now has attained finality.

¶19

The Tribunal considering the number and nature of the injuries proved to have been sustained by the claimant in the motor accident and the amount proved to have been spent on treatment, awarded Rs.18,000/- towards loss of income during the period of treatment; Rs.7,000/-towards pain and suffering; Rs.5,000/- for medical expenses; and Rs.5,000/- for special diet

¶20

<2/

¶21

M.A.C.NO. 339 of 2011

¶22

and other incidental expenses. The Tribunal, thus, awarded a total sum of Rs.35,000/- as compensation to the claimant for the injuries sustained by her in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on -the above amount of compensation of Rs.35,000/- @ 6 % per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri V.K. Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal has erred in awarding low compensation of Rs.35,000/- only though the appellant/ claimant sustained multiple serious injuries including fractures in the motor accident resulting in permanent disability tp the extent of 30%.. 7) Shri Raj Awasthi, learned counsel for respondent No.3, the New India Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Tractor-Trolley, on the other hand, supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.35,000/awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances ofthe present case.

¶23

In a motor accident claim case, what is important is that, the compensation to be awarded by thp 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, nora Bonanza. 9) Now we shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.35,000/awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case.

¶24

¶25

M.A.C.No. 339 of 2011

¶26

/^^

¶27

it..--'y

¶28

Claimant Subho Bai, was aged about 40 years on the date of the accident. At the relevant time, she used to work as labour and was having regular income of Rs.3,500/- per month. The claimant sustained multiple serious injuries-in the motor accident and remained hospitalized for sufficiently long period is borne out from the evidence available on record. The claimant being labour could not have performed her duties as labour for a period of about six months on account of the injuries sustained by her in the motor accident.

¶29

The compensation of Rs.35,000/- awarded by the Tribunal when examined in the context of the aj)ove mentioned broad features of the case, in our opinion, is certainly on the lower side and deserves to be enhanced to some extent.

¶30

Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, we are of the opinion that further award of Rs.15,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation would make the compensation of Rs.35,000/- awarded by the Tribunal asjust and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of '^.. the present case.

¶31

The appeal filed by the appellanV claimant for enhancement ofthe compensation, therefore, is allowed in part. The claimant is awarded further sum of Rs.15,000/inclusive of jnterest component on the enhanced amount of compensation in addition to the sum of Rs.35,000/- awar<jed by the Tribunal.

¶32

1. Respondent. No.3 the New India Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time-for depositing the total sum 'l-

--'T""^^.'^t. '^

M.A.C.No. 339 of 2011

¶38

of Rs.15,000/(Rupees fifteen thousand only) before the

¶39

concerning Claims Tribunal.

¶40

No order as to costs.

Sd/-

ChiefJustice

Sd/-

R.N. Chandrakar

Judge

subbu

Subho Bai v. Smt. Aasha Devi and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subho Bai v. Smt. Aasha Devi and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gayatri Bai and Ors. Vs Damarudhar Sao and Ors.

Nandu Devi and Others Vs Dinesh Patkar and Others

Smt. Gouri Verma and Ors. Vs Fareed Khan and Ors.

Asha Chouhan and Others Vs Viresh Kumar and Others

Ramesh Kumar Tiwary Vs Mohammad Saleem Siddiquee and Ors.

Kailash Ram Vs Rajendra Singh Chhabda and Others