Ashok Kumar Thakur Vs Sanjay Kumar Sahu

¶1

1

¶2

AMIT PATEL

¶3

Digitally signed by AMIT PATEL

¶4

2025:CGHC:12943

¶5

NAFR

¶6

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶7

MAC No. 209 of 2017

¶8

Ashok Kumar Thakur S/o Late Shri Dular Singh Thakur, Aged About 23 Years CasteDhakad, R/o Village- Patarras, Police Station- Dantewada, Civil And Revenue DistrictDantewada, Chhattisgarh.

¶9

...Appellant/Claimant

¶10

Versus

¶11

1 - Sanjay Kumar Sahu S/o Shri Rishi Kumar Sahu, Aged About 33 Years R/o Andheri Chauk Bacheli, Police Station- Bacheli, Civil And Revenue District- Dantewada, Chhattisgarh ................Driver Of The Offending Vehicle Track No. C.G.18 T/0760

¶12

2 - Man Singh Thakur S/o Shri Dariyab Singh, Aged About 40 Years R/o New Bus Stand Bacheli, Police Station- Bacheli, Civil And Revenue District- Dantewada, Chhattisgarh ................Owner Of The Offending Vehicle Track No. C.G.18 T/0760

¶13

3 - Shriram General Insurance Company Limited, Through The Branch Manager, Branch Office- Bacheli, Police Station- Bacheli, Civil And Revenue District- Dantewada, Chhattisgarh, Main Branch E-8, Riko Industrial Area Sitapur, Jaipur Rajsthan ................Insurer Of The Offending Vehicle Track No. C.G.18 T/0760

¶14

... Respondents

¶15

For Appellant : Shri Parasmani Shriwas, Advocate. For Respondents No. 1 : Shri Manharan Lal Sahu, Advocate on behalf of Shri Rajat Agrawal, Advocate. For Respondent No.3 : Smt. Swati Agrawal, Advocate on behalf of Shri Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate.

¶16

Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Judgment on Board

¶17

17.03.2025

¶18

The Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred by the Claimant/appellant under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1988') questioning the legality and propriety of the award dated 30.01.2017 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, South Bastar Dantewada, (C.G.) in Claim Case No. 52/2014, whereby the learned Tribunal

¶19

2

¶20

while allowing the claim in part has awarded the total amount of compensation to the tune of Rs.17,452/- with interest @ 9% per annum, in favour of the appellant/claimant.

¶21

Briefly stated the facts of the case are that on 08.03.2012 at about 08.00 A.M. the appellant was coming from village- Patarras to Dantewada by his motorcycle with friends and reached near the Santoshi Mandir, State Bank Chowk, Dantewada and at that time, the offending vehicle Truck Bearing Registration No. CG-18-T-0760 being ridden by respondent No. 1 rashly and negligently dashed the appellant from the front side, due to which, claimant/appellant sustained grievous injuries, particularly on his left leg and other different parts of the body. Report regarding the alleged accident was lodged at Police Station- Dantewada based upon which crime bearing No. 27/12 under Sections 279 and 337 of IPC was registered against the respondent No. 1-driver.

¶22

On account of aforesaid accident, the appellant/claimant instituted a claim petition under section 166 of the Act of 1988 by submitting inter alia that at the time of the accident, the claimant, was of 23 years old, was taking care of himself and his family by earning an income of Rs.6,000/- per month. During the course of his treatment, appellant has spent heavy amount towards his treatment and also become permanently disabled. Therefore, total amount of compensation to the tune of Rs. 5,00,000/- has been claimed under various heads.

¶23

Learned Claims Tribunal after appreciating oral and documentary evidence awarded a sum of Rs.17,452/-. Hence, this appeal filed by the claimant.

¶24

Learned counsel for the appellant/claimant submits that the impugned award is bad, illegal and also against the eye of law, learned Tribunal finds that appellant has received grievous injury in his left leg and other parts of the

¶25

3

¶26

body, his primary treatment was done in the District Hospital, Dantewada and due to his serious condition, he was referred to Maharani Hospital, Jagdalpur for his proper treatment and spent heavy amount for the same, but the learned Claims Tribunal has not considered this pleading and awarded a meager amount as a compensation, which deserves to be enhanced. He further submit that the appellant was 23 years old young person and he was earned Rs. 6,000/- per month from the driving work, during the course of treatment, appellant has spent heavy amount and also became permanently disabled, but the learned Claims Tribunal has ignored this fact and only Rs. 17,452/- has been awarded, so this appeal is filed by the appellant for enhancement, therefore, the impugned award deserves to be enhanced.

¶27

Learned counsel for the respondents support the impugned award.

¶28

I have heard counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶29

Learned Claims Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent riding of respondent No.1 and appellant/claimant suffered grievous injuries and learned Claims Tribunal also found that appellant/claimant filed his disability certificate, but he did not examine any doctor to prove this certificate. Thus, in absence of any expert evidence regarding permanent disability of the claimant, the Claims Tribunal was justified in not awarding any amount under this head as also towards loss of future income. However, considering the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant, the period of his hospitalization i.e. from 08.03.2012 to 07.05.2012 in Maharani hospital, Jagdalpur, the medical documents filed by the claimant and the fact that the claimant suffered grievous injuries, this Court is of the opinion that the amount awarded by the Tribunal towards medical expenses, pain and suffering, special diet and conveyance are on the lower side and needs to be enhanced suitably.

¶30

4

¶31

Thus, in the given facts and circumstances of the case and the evidence available on record, the claimant is held entitle for compensation in the following manner:-

¶32

S.No.	Particular	Awarded by the Tribunal	Awarded by this Court
1.	Medical Expenses	7,452/-	15,452/-
2.	For Pain and Suffering	5,000/-	5,000/-
3.	For Special Diet	5,000/-	5,000/-
4.	For Conveyance	Nil	3,000/-
5.	For Attendant	Nil	2,000/-
5.	For Loss of income during treatment for two months @ Rs.6,000/- P.M.	Nil	12,000/-
6.	Loss of Future Income	Nil	Nil
	Total	17,452/-	42,452/-

¶33

On the basis of aforesaid discussion, the claimant/appellant is held entitled for a total compensation of Rs. 42,452/--. Since, the Claims Tribunal has already awarded Rs.17,452/-, after deducting the said amount, the claimant/appellant is entitled for enhanced amount of Rs. 25,000/-. This additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing of claim application till realization.

¶34

10.In the result, the appeal is allowed in part and the award impugned stands modified to the extent indicated above.

¶35

Sd/- (Rajani Dubey)

¶36

Judge

¶37

AMIT PATEL

Ashok Kumar Thakur v. Sanjay Kumar Sahu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashok Kumar Thakur v. Sanjay Kumar Sahu

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

Nitesh Thakkar Vs Smt. Bhanumati Thakkar

Vishnu Prasad Kashyap Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sandeep Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Dharamveer Sharma Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.

Dhan Singh Patel Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Dilip Rajak Vs State of Chhattisgarh