IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI

th

ON THE 9 OF FEBRUARY, 2026 MISC. APPEAL No. 5562 of 2023 SONAL Versus ARVIND AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Tarun Kushwah - Advocate for the appellant.

Shri Rajesh Pandit - Advocate with Shri Sudarshan Pandit - Advocate for respondent no.2.

ORDER This Misc. Appeal under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has been filed by the appellant assailing the impugned award dated 12.05.2023 passed by I Additional Member Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sardarpur, district Dhar (M.P.) in Claim Case No.220/2019, whereby an amount of Rs.2,29,034/- has been awarded to the claimant who suffered injuries in a road traffic accident on 06.06.2019 in between 8:30 to 9:30 in the evening when a motorcycle bearing No.MP-11-MZ-1565 driven rashly and negligently dashed the appellant and she suffered fracture of right tibia fibula bone and consequently, disablement.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Claims Tribunal has taken the income of the appellant as 4,500/- whereas as per circular issued by the Labour Department of Government of M.P. under the Minimum Wages Act, it should have been Rs.7,700/- and future prospects @40% should have been taken. He further submits that Ex.P-79 certificate issued by the Dr. Mohansingh Jamra (PW-2) and proved by him wherein permanent disability has been mentioned as 50% and the same has not been considered by the Tribunal merely on the ground that appellant has not mentioned in her statement that how this functional disability has been caused as she was serving in Beauty Parlour. He further submits that looking to the work undertaken by the appellant, the permanent disability should atleast be taken as 15%. Hence, prays for allowing this appeal and enhancing the award amount.

4 . Per contra, learned counsel for the Insurance Company opposed the prayer and submits that functional disability was not proved, therefore, learned Claims Tribunal was right in not awarding any amount under the head of permanent disability and prays for dismissal of the appeal being devoid of substance.

5. Heard and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6. On perusal of the record and the evidence available on record it undisputed that the appellant suffered two fractures in left leg and consequently she was issued disability certificate Ex.P-79 and proved by Dr.Mohansingh Jamra (PW-2) which mentions that she suffered 50% permanent disability. Even if this was not the percentage of permanent disability, even then 15% functional disability should have been taken by the Claims Tribunal. In this regard, the Claims Tribunal fell in error, otherwise, in actual medical bills and in the head of pain and suffering, loss of income, attender and transport satisfactory amount has been awarded. Thus, this Court is of the view that if permanent disability is taken as 15%. The income should be taken as per the circular issued by the Labour Department of Government of M.P. under the Minimum Wages Act, which comes to Rs.7,700/- and adding 40% future prospects, the just and proper compensation comes as under:

Rs.7,700/- per month + Rs.3,080/- (40% Future Prospects) =

Permanent Rs.10,780/- per month x 12 = Rs.1,29,360/- x 15 disability (multiplier) = Rs.19,40,400 x 15%(PD) =Rs.2,91,060/-

7. Accordingly, claimant/appellant is entitled to an additional sum of Rs.2,91,060/- over and above the amount which has been awarded by the Tribunal.

8. The appeal is valued as Rs.1,50,000/- and for the rest of the amount the claimant will pay the requisite Court fees within a period of 30 days from today and only thereafter enhanced amount will be disbursed. 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.

9. Resultantly, the appeal filed by the appellant/claimant is allowed to