Allowed

Pawan Kumar Tiwari v. Chandra Shekhar Sahu And Ors.

Chhattisgarh HC5 Mar 2014MAC/980/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court, in a Section 173 appeal, allowed the appellant to enhance the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. The Court increased future medical, special diet, and pain and suffering allowances, increased loss of income, and awarded a new amount for transportation, resulting in an additional sum of Rs. 43,000/-.

What did the court decide?

Additional compensation of Rs. 43,000/- awarded with interest at 6% p.a., modifying the Tribunal's award.

Pawan Kumar Tiwari Vs Chandra Shekhar Sahu And Ors. — Motor Accident Claims | Chhattisgarh HC (2014)

¶1

1N THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT

¶2

BILAS^UR

¶3

MISC. APPEAL (Q No. ^ &G OF 2013

¶4

APPEALLANT

¶5

APPLICANT

¶6

Pawan Kumar Tiwari S/o Anup Ku Tiar

¶7

Tiwari., Aged about- 32 years^

¶8

R/o Gondpara, Bilaspur, P.S. City

Kotwali,Bilaspur,

-;,^

^••' .^'•'

^IGSPONDENTS

NON APPLICANTS

Tah. & Dist- Bilaspur (C.G.)

¶16

VERSUS

¶17

Chandra Sheldiar Sahu,'

¶18

S/o Madan Lal Sahu, Aged about 31'' yeca. R/o Village - Belaudi,P.S. Ranchiraiya,

¶19

Dist- Durg (C.G.) (Non Applicant No.l) (Driver ofBolcro No. C.G. 04, HA-9335;

¶20

¶21

Shiv Narayan Gajendra, S/o Ganpath

¶22

Ram Aged About 45 Years,

¶23

R/o House No. 302, Hanuman

¶24

' Society, Kalibadi, P.S. Civil Line, Tah.<& Dist.- Raipur (C.G.)

¶25

(Non Applicant No.2)

¶26

(Owncr ofBolcro No. C.G. 04, HA-9335

¶27

¶28

National Insurance Company Ltd.

¶29

Through- Branch Manager,

¶30

Taha Complex, Vyapar Vihar Road,

¶31

P.S. Civil Line,

¶32

Tah. & Dist- Bilaspur (C.G.)

¶33

' (Non ApplicantNo.3)

¶34

(Insurer ofBolero N'o. C.G. 04, HA-933i

¶35

.^^]

¶36

£^ r"

¶37

MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL U/S 173 OF THE MOTOR

¶38

VEHICLE ACT.

¶39

l0l i<r

¶40

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶41

SB: Hon'ble Shri Justice Pritinker Diwaker

M.A.(C)No.980of2013

Appellant

Pawan Kumar Tiwari

VERSUS

^Nl*

Respondents

Present:

Chandra Shekhar Sahu and others

¶51

Shri Ravindra Sharma, counsel for the appellant. None for respondents No. 1 & 2.

¶52

Shri Ratan Pusty, counsel for respondent No.3.

ORDER

(5th March, 2014)

|NN»

This appeal filed by the injured-claimant arises out of the award dated 30th July, 2013 passed by III Additional Motor Accident Clajms Tribunal, Bilaspur (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") in claim case No.40/12awarding compensation of Rs.52,200/- in favour ofthe

¶57

injured-claimant.

¶58

Facts of the case, in brief, are that on 19.9.2011 when the appellant was sitting as pillion rider in the motorcycle of his friend and was going towards his home, the said motorcycle was dashed by a vehicle Bolero bearing registration No.C.G.04 H.A./9335 which was being driven by respondent No.1 in a rashand negtigent manner, as a result of which the appellant suffered number of injuries on his face and other parts ofthe body, including fracture of right leg.

¶59

A claim case was filed by the injured-claimant before the Tribunal for compensation of Rs.18 lacs, inter alia, pleading that at the relevant time, he was working as supervisor in a private coal company, was getting salary of Rs.10,000/- p.m. and on account of said accident as he could not attend the duties for quite some time, he has been removed from his job.

¶60

However, the Tribunal after appreciation of the evidence on record by the impugned award has granted a total compensation of

J^^

•>., ^

1 YS^

¶65

^"»

¶66

¶67

, Rs.52,200/- with interest @ 6% p.a. in favour ofthe claimant, 05. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the compensation as awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side and the same is required to be enhanced suitably. He submits that the medical bills totaling to Rs.1,11,200/- were submitted by the claimant, but without there being any sufficient reason the Tribunal disbelieving someofthe bills has awarded a meager amount of Rs.30,200/- under this head. He further submits that even as on date the appellant has to undergo regular physiotherapy for the injuries suffered by him in the said accident and therefore, the Tribunal should have awarded suitable compensation in favour of the appellant for future medical expenses. Lastly, he submits that the amounts awarded by the Tribunal towards special diet, attendant, loss of income, pain and suffering are also on the lower side and require suitable enhancement.

¶68

On the other hand, supporting the impugned award it has been argued by learned counsel for respondent No.3 that the appellant was hospitalized only for 9 days and looking to the nature of injuries and the extent of disablement suffered by the appellant, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal can not be termed as insufficient or . inadequate, rather it is qn the higher side. 07. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶69

The Tribunal while awarding medical expenses of Rs.30,200/- in favour of the claimant has held that though various bills have been submitted by theclaimant but the bills Ex.P/16 to P/29 can not be relied upon because they are not supported by any prescription of the medical practitioner and further that all these medicines were purchased on one particular date. 1 find no illegality in the finding recorded by the Tribunal in this respect. The Tribunal was fully justified in awarding Rs.30,200/- in favour of the claimant towards medicat expenses on the basis of bills Ex.P/11 to P/15.

¶70

So far as the amount of Rs.5,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards future medical expenses after discharge his concerned, in the

")i

-)E s'r

^N»

facts and circumstances of the case, the same is required to be and is, accordingly, enhanced to Rs.10,000/-. Likewise, the amount of Rs.2,000/- awarded towards special diet is enhanced to Rs.10,000/-. However, the amount of Rs.5,000/- awarded towards attendant being just and reasonable is kept intact. 10. As regards loss of income for two months, the appellant has specifically pleaded and proved that his monthty income was Rs. 10,0007- and therefore, he is definitely entitled for Rs.20,000/- under this head instead of Rs.5,000/-. It is ordered accordingly. 11. So far as the amount of Rs.5,000/- awarded towards pain and suffering is concerned, the same appears to be on the lower side and is, therefore, enhanced to Rs.15,000/-. 12. The Tribunal has not awarded any amount towards transportation, hence considering the fact that the appellant/claimant must have spent certain amount towards transportation in connection with his treatment, he is.held entitled for a sum of Rs.5,000/- under this head.

¶77

On the basis of aforesaid discussions, the appellant is held entitled for a total compensation of Rs.95,200/-. and since the Tribunal has already awarded Rs.52,200/-, after deducting the same the appellant is entitled for an additional compensation of Rs. 43,000/-. This additional amount of compensation shall carry the interest @ 6% p.a. as awarded by the Tribunal from the date of filing of claim petition till realization.

¶78

In the result, the appeal is allowed and the award impugned ' stands modified to the above extent. Sd/Pririnker Diwaker Judge

¶79

J^- ^•'M...^

¶80

-J

¶81

m'T

Pawan Kumar Tiwari v. Chandra Shekhar Sahu And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pawan Kumar Tiwari v. Chandra Shekhar Sahu 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

The Oriental Insurance Com. Ltd. Vs Smt. Wetti Hungi and Ors.

Uttam Kumar Vs Ramkisun and Others

Arvind Kumar Dewangan Vs Executive Engineer, Public Works Department B/R Division And Ors.

Sardar Kuljeet Singh Kohli Vs Smt.Rajkumari Gupta and Others

Bajrang Lal Agrawal Vs the New India Insurance Co.Ltd.and Ors.

Smt.ram Bai And Ors. Vs Kirti Kumar Soni And Ors.