Agam Nirmalkar Vs Munnalal Patel

¶1

1

¶2

2026:CGHC:17477

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

MAC No. 1123 of 2020

¶6

1 - Agam Nirmalkar S/o Ramji Nirmalkar Aged About 28 Years R/o Dabarapara, Bhilai 3, Police Station Bhilai 3, Tahsil And District Durg, Chhattisgarh

¶7

... Appellant (s)

¶8

versus

¶9

1 - Munnalal Patel S/o Bal Govind Patel Aged About 40 Years R/o Arjun Nagar, Camp 1, Chhawani, Tahsil And District, Durg, Cg, (Owner Of Offending Vehicle Truck Cg-07, Ca2965)

¶10

2 - Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited Through Branch Manager, Branch Office, Ghadi Chowk Supela, Near Traffic Police Office, Supela Bhilai, Tahsil And District Durg, Chhattisgarh (Insurer Of Offending Vehicle Truck Cg-07, Ca- 2965)

¶11

... Respondent(s)

¶12

For Appellant(s)	:	Mr. Praveen Dhurandhar, Advocate.
For Respondent No.1	:	Mr. Gurprit Kumar Bhatia on behalf of Mr. HAPS Bhatia, Advocate.
For Respondent No.2	:	Mr. S.K. Kushwaha, Advocate.

¶13

Digitally signed by KRISHNA KRISHNA KUMAR KUMAR BARVE BARVE Date: 2026.04.17 20:34:37 +0530

¶14

2

¶15

(Single Bench)

¶16

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal

¶17

Order On Board

¶18

16/04/2026

¶19

The appellant/claimant has preferred this Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short ‘the Act, 1988’) calling in question the legality, validity and correctness of the award dated 3.10.2019 passed by the 10 th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Durg (for short ‘the Claims Tribunal’) in Claim Case No.217/2017 by which liability to pay compensation of Rs.2,67,100/- has been fastened on the Insurance Company. In the present Appeal, the appellant/claimant has prayed for enhancement of the compensation amount.

¶20

Mr. S.K. Kushwaha, learned counsel for respondent No.2 would submit that the appellant/claimant has suffered permanent disability to the extent of 22% and treating doctor Akhilesh Yadav has also issued certificate to this effect and, therefore, the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is just and proper.

¶21

On the other hand, Mr. Praveen Dhurandhar, learned counsel for the appellant/claimant would pray for enhancement of the amount of compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal.

¶22

I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection.

¶23

3

¶24

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and after going through the record, this Court is of the opinion that the Claims Tribunal was not justified in awarding an amount of Rs.2,67,100/- as compensation, inasmuch as in the accident the present appellant has suffered compound fracture in his right leg. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, looking to the injuries suffered by the appellant, it would be appropriate to enhance award amount. As such, the appellant will be entitled for the following compensation

¶25

as computed by this Court:-

¶26

Sr. No.	Heads	Compensation awarded by the Tribunal	Compensation awarded by this Court
1.	Loss of earning	-	Rs.7500 x 40% (future prospect) = Rs.10,500 x 5% (earning capacity) = Rs.525 x 12 = Rs.6300 x 17 (multiplier) = Rs.1,07,100/-
2.	Loss during treatment	Rs.7500 x 3 = Rs.22,500/-	Rs.7500 x 3 = Rs.22,500/-
3.	Medical Bills	Rs.2,25,000/-	Rs.2,25,000/-
4.	Pain & suffering and healthydiet	Rs.10,000/-	Rs.40,000/-
5.	Assistance	Rs.4,600/-	Rs.10,000/-
6.	Transportation	Rs.5,000/-	Rs.10,000/-
7.	Future treatment	-	Rs.10,000/-
	Total	Rs.2,67,100/-	Rs.4,24,600/-

¶27

4

¶28

In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of ₹2,67,100/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to ₹4,24,600/- . Hence, after deducting the amount of ₹2,67,100/- , the appellant is held to be entitled to an additional amount of ₹1,57,500/- . The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the amount of compensation within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The additional amount of from the date of

¶29

compensation shall carry interest @ 9% per annum filing of claim application before the Tribunal till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact.

¶30

With the aforesaid modifications, the Appeal is disposed of.

¶31

Sd/-

¶32

(Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge

¶33

Barve

Agam Nirmalkar v. Munnalal Patel

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Agam Nirmalkar v. Munnalal Patel

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

The New India Assurance Company Limited Vs Smt. Savita Sandilya

Bablu Dewangan Vs Vifal @ Prakash Vishwakarma

Rameshwari Markhandey Vs Smt. Dropati Markhandey

The Oriental Insurance Company Limited Vs Kunwar Singh Keshar

Smt. Balwanti Tirkey Vs Satish Kashyap

Meena Banjare Vs Ramprasad