logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide

24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 MPHC 145 print Preview print print
Court : High Court of Madhya Pradesh (Bench at Indore)
Case No : MISC. Appeal No. 8827 of 2025
Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI
Parties : Akash Versus Jakir Khan & Others
Appearing Advocates : For the Appellant: Sachin Parmar, Advocate. For the Respondents: None, Mayank Upadhyay, Advocate.
Date of Judgment : 14-05-2026
Head Note :-
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Section 173 (1) -

Comparative Citation:
2026 MPHC-IND 14328,
Judgment :-

1. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally.

This miscellaneous appeal has been preferred under Section 173 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the impugned award dated 30.06.2025 passed by Third Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Shajapur (M.P.) in Claim Case No.212 of 2024, whereby an amount of Rs.3,45,550/- with interest @ 6% per annum has been awarded from the date of filing of claim petition i.e. 20.11.2024 to the appellant / injured.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant suffered fracture in right femur bone and ribs. He also suffered injuries nearby right eye and also suffered grievous injuries all over the body. He submits that the amount awarded is lower in side, hence prays for enhancement of the compensation amount at least by Rs.65,000/-, over and above the amount already awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal, by allowing this appeal, looking to over all evidence available on record.

3. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent / Insurance Company has opposed the prayer on the ground that amount awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal is adequate and requires no enhancement in award amount. All the factors have been considered by the learned Claims Tribunal while awarding the compensation amount. Hence, learned counsel prays for dismissal of the appeal.

4. Heard and considered the rival submissions raised at bar by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

5. From perusal of the record, it is apparent that appellant sustained fractures of right femur bone and ribs and other grievous injuries. Looking to the aforesaid evidence available on record, the amount awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal is found in lower side, hence prayer made on behalf of the appellant appears to be reasonable and therefore, this Court is of the view that if at least a lump sum amount of Rs.65,000/- is awarded, over and above the amount already awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal, the same will sub serve the ends of justice.

6. Therefore, without going into the nicety of the computation of the amount, the amount is enhanced and appellant / injured is entitled to an additional lump sum amount of Rs.65,000/- , over and above the amount, which has been awarded by the Claims Tribunal.

7. Since the appeal has been valued at Rs.40,000/- only, therefore, the appellant is directed to pay additional court fees on the rest of the amount of Rs.25,000/- within a period of 30 days from today at the prevailing slab of court fees, thereafter, the same will be disbursed to the appellant. Other terms and conditions of the impugned award including rate of interest @ 6% shall remain intact.

8. Subject to payment of requisite additional court fees within the aforesaid period, the enhanced amount shall also carry interest at the same rate. It is made clear, in case the court fees is not paid within the stipulated period, the appellant will not be entitled for claiming interest on the enhanced amount beyond 30 days' period, till the payment of requisite court fees.

9. Resultantly, the appeal filed by the appellant / injured is allowed to the extent as indicated herein above. Let a copy of this order along with record be sent to the concerned Claims Tribunal immediately for necessary compliance.

10. With consent, IA No.10990 of 2025 , an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for condonation of 27 days delay in filing the present appeal, also stands allowed; and delay is hereby condoned.

 
  CDJLawJournal