Jaw-Fracture Victim Gets No Higher Compensation As Chhattisgarh HC Cites Six-Day Hospital Stay And No Proof Of Permanent Disability

The appellant, injured in a road accident on 4 May 2020, challenged the award of the 2nd Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur, dated 29 September 2023.

The Tribunal awarded total compensation of ₹2,47,493 for his injuries, including a fracture of the right mandibular cortical bone and related treatment.

The appellant sought enhancement, contending that his monthly income from a gents’ parlour was ₹20,000, that future treatment expenses should have been awarded, and that the amounts under other heads were inadequate.

The High Court condoned the 45-day delay in filing the appeal.

The appeal was brought under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which provides for an appeal against an award of a Claims Tribunal.

The Court assessed the challenge by examining the evidence on income, injuries, treatment, medical expenses, hospitalisation, and disability to determine whether the Tribunal’s award required interference.

The Court upheld the Tribunal’s rejection of the claimed ₹20,000 monthly income because the appellant produced no documents supporting his assertion that he ran a gents’ parlour; it considered the Tribunal’s assessment of income at ₹8,060 per month reasonable.

The medical records showed six days of hospitalisation and surgery for the mandibular fracture, and the Tribunal had considered the medical bills. The appellant had produced no documents or medical certificate establishing permanent disability.

Having considered the injuries, treatment, hospitalisation, absence of permanent disability, and medical expenses, the Court found no basis to enhance the award.

The appeal was dismissed at the motion stage as devoid of merit.