Balaram Rana Vs Sharafat Hussain

¶1

1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

MAC No. 436 of 2018

¶5

1. Balaram Rana S/o late Ramu Ram Rana aged about 35 years, Caste – Halba, R/o Bade Bacheli Lal Bahadur Sashtri Ward, PS Bacheli, District South Bastar, Dantewada, CG.

¶6

---- Appellant/Claimant

¶7

Versus

¶8

1. Sharafat Hussain S/o Jakir Hussain, aged about 32 years, R/o New Market Bacheli, PO PS Bacheli, District South Bastar, Dantewada, CG Permanent R/o Balod Post Ghumka Tahsil Balod District Durg, CG

¶9

(Driver of the vehicle)

¶10

2. Brij Bhushan Makan S/o Kundan Lal Makan, R/o Ward No. 02 New Market Bacheli, PO Bacheli, District South Bastar, Dantewada, CG (Owner of the vehicle)

¶11

3. Shri Ram General Insurance Company Limited, Issue Office – 10003-E8 RICO Industrial Area Sitapur – Jaipur PIN 302022 State Rajsthan, India. Branch Office Add. Maruti Hights Mahoba Bazar Raipur, CG (Insurer of the vehicle)

¶12

	---Respondents
For appellant	- Shri Vikash A. Shrivastava, Advocate
For respondents No. 3	- Shri Deepak Gupta, Advocate

¶13

Order on Board by Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput

¶14

08/02/2024

¶15

This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act (for short “MV Act”) is against the impugned award dated 20.07.2017 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for short “Tribunal”) South Bastar, Dantewada,CG, in Claim Case No. 29/2015.

¶16

2

¶17

This is an injury case. The claimant’s case has been that on 14.08.2014 when the appellant/claimant was going to village Bhansi from Bacheli on motorcycle, the offending vehicle being driven by its driver rashly and negligently hit it as a result of which, he suffered grievous injuries on his body whereas the other rider of the motorcycle died on the spot.

¶18

Learned Tribunal awarded Rs. 04,00,000/- as compensation as against Rs. 15,00,000/-. Hence this appeal for enhancement.

¶19

Counsel for the appellants submits that the assessment of the income of the claimant-injured looking to his disability and the amount awarded on conventional heads is on the lower side and needs enhancement. He submits that nothing has been awarded towards future prospects, and therefore this aspect is also required to be considered.

¶20

Counsel for respondent/insurer however supports the award under challenge.

¶21

Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶22

Learned Tribunal has taken the monthly income of the appellant/ claimant at Rs. 4,500/- which in the facts and circumstances of the case and the legal position existing as of now, is replaced by Rs. 5,500/-. Adding 25% towards future prospects i.e. Rs. 1,375/-, the monthly income of the injured who at the time of accident was aged about 35 years comes to Rs. 6,875 and Rs. 82,500/- per annum. Taking the permanent disability on account of the injuries suffered in the accident into consideration the loss of annual income to the extent of 50% as taken by the Tribunal takes the figure to Rs. 41,250/-. After applying the multiplier of 14, the total loss of income comes to Rs. 05,77,500/-. Order accordingly. The amount of Rs. 5,000/- for medicines during treatment and Rs. 6,000/- for keeping the attendant, as awarded by the Tribunal is maintained. Rs. 6,000/- towards nutritional diet awarded by the Tribunal is however enhanced to Rs. 10,000/- and amount of Rs. 5,000/-

¶23

3

¶24

for pain and suffering is enhanced to Rs. 25,000/-. The total compensation thus comes to Rs. 6,23,500/- and after deducting Rs. 4,00,000/- already awarded by the Tribunal, the enhanced compensation for which the appellant is now entitled to, comes to Rs. 2,23,500/-

¶25

This enhanced compensation to be deposited within sixty days from today will carry interest @ 6% from the date of appeal till realization. On that being done, Rs. 2,00,000/- shall be invested in the name of the appellant/injured in fixed deposit in a nationalized bank for a period of 03 years. Remain-

¶26

ing amount shall be paid to him through bank transaction.

¶27

Appeal thus allowed in part.

¶28

Sd/-

¶29

(Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge

¶30

Jyotishi

Balaram Rana v. Sharafat Hussain

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balaram Rana v. Sharafat Hussain

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dinesh Kumar Vaishnav Vs Shatruhan Khairwar

Prahalad Sahu Vs Sudhir Sultaniya

Smt. Radhika Devi Vs Jaisingh

Phanendra Kumar Sahu Vs Neeraj Pathak

Smt Pinki Chowdhary Vs Mishra Rana Singh

Vijay Bahadur Singh Vs Satya Prakash Sahu