T... C^) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR fC.G.) • M.A. (C) Ijj^ 1200') Btvision &B,. APPELLANT : National Insurance Company Ltd. NON-APPLICANT Through : Branch Manager, National Insurance Company limited, Office : Gill Complex, near Gurudwara, Roilway Station, Durg District Durg (C.G.) s.^.^ ^••^''^rc^^s^ •^.^;^..?-^ y^ ^ VERSUS RESPONDENTS CLAIMANT ^ RESPONDENT NON-APPLICANT-1 RESPONDENT NON-APPLICANT-2 (-? 2. 3. Benzamin Lorence S/o lote A. BondikQt Larence aged obout 22 years R/o Ambedkar Ward, Signal Toly, District Gondiya, M.S. Present R/o 90 D, Pragati Nagar, BMY Charoda, Thana Bhilai 3, District Durg (Chhattisgarh) Arun Kumar S/o Mahodev Rai aged about 37 years, R/o Azad Chowk, KasQrideeh, Durg District Durg (C.G.) Subodh Bonsal S/o HQrish Bansol oged about 37 years, R/o Civik Center Bhilai, District Durg (C.G.) MiscellQnceous ApDeal under Section 1 73 of the Motor Vehicle Act 1994 ^ 7i^ w^icw^^o^a-MAjr^^^i^TM^^^ bIVISIQN BENCH: HON'BLE MR. I.M.QUD&USI & HON'BLE MR. 6HULAM MINHAJUD_MM JJ, Aj3(?e!Jont ftespondents M.A. rd No.1173/2009 National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Benazmin Larence & 2 others pnesignt; Mr. S.C. Verma, Advocate for the appellant. Mr< Shravon Agarwai, Advoca-te for nsspondent No.l- Mr. U. Pandey, Advocate for respondent Nos. 2 & 3 ORDER rOralV (22nd Ju(y. 2011) I.M. Quddusi. J; 1. Heard. 2< The appellant-Insurance Company has ftled this miscellaneous opjwal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short the Act") against th®eward da-ted 27.12.2008 passed by the learned 2nd Additiorsol Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Durg (for short 'the Claims Trtbynaf) in Claim Case No.73/2008 partly allowing claim opplication of the injured cfaimant. 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that on 10.2.2008 the injur'ed claimant, atona with his relative, was going towards Raipur on 1+»emotorcycle and when they reached near Power ©rade<&ate, Kumhari, a Santro Car bearina registration number €©07-5484,being driven in rash and ne9ligent manner by its driver, dashed their motorcycle from back as a result one Danieal John died on the spot ond 1+ie injured claimant sustained grievous injuries on varicMJS parts of his body including fracture in the right shoulder. He was odmitted in the Sector-9 Hospital, Bhilai from where he was dlischar^d on 17.2.2008, The injured claimant has fileda ctaim petition seeking compensation to the tune of fts.10,85,000/- on the ground that his treatment is still 9oin9-on ouid os a result of injuries received by him in the said accjdent, he has sustained permanent disability. s\ '^^ ';^:^. .^;lt^ •Q 4. The Claims Tribunalpartly allowedclaim ^pllcation of the injured claimant, awarded a sum of Rs.4,68,000/- as compensation ouqd fastened lid>ility w\ the appellant-Insurance Company to pay the compensation. 5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the (mpugned order as also records of the Claims Trjbunal below. 6. Perusal of the record show that a certificate WQS issued in favour of the injured-claimant by 1+ie doctor of the 6ovemment Hospital/ Durg but 1tie Claims Tribunal without examining the treat}n9 doctor, who tr^ated the claimant in Sector-9 Hospital, Durg, has passed—t+ieimpugned award; Further, the Ctaims Tribunal has not considered functiwual disablement wi1+i reference to permoinent disability sustained by the injyred as the loss of earning capadty is not a substitute for peroentage of the permanent disability. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the mat^er reqyires reconsideration at the end of the Claims Tribunal. 7, Accordingly, we allow the instant appeat in part, set aside 1+ie award dtated 27.12.2008 passed in Claim Case No.73/2008 by the Claims Trjbunal and remit the matt-er back to the Claims Tribunal for decision afrash. The Claims Tribunal shall provide oppbrtunity to 1+ie parties to odduc^ further evidence, if any, and shali follow the provisions of Sections 168 & 169 of 1+ie Act, t988 and Rule 226 of the Motor Vehicles Kules in deciding the ctaim petition. The parties shall also be entitted to aiinenci -the pleadinas and file or verify 1+ie documents already fited^ The ainount, whidi has already been deposited by fhe cppellant-Insurance Company ouid yet not disbursed to the claimant, shalf not be either refunded to the appellont or disbursed to the claimant till the decision is taken afresh by the Ckxims Tribunal, 8. The parties are directed to appear before the Claims Tribunal concemed on 2^ Au^ust. 2011 either in person or through their counsel. 9. The Registry is directed to transmit the record of the Claims tribunal concerned without furllher delay. Certified copy as per rules. Roshan/- Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- G. Minhajuddin Judge