3ii^r?iiR-ii<<i W 31R?T sbllli ~." A •ygvf '^MWtf, w-^wie, (qwi+iy MINdl (hill* ....MA.G......^8^Q3,..^ ^ sn^r ira% ('j^f^^i) ^^ITWdfelCT^T APPEU-ANT/ CLAiMANT NON-A? ••\l\i 1 ^ : 3. (Appea! under Section 1 n!i,5-; UiViSion sencn Hon'ble !v1r. L.C.. Bhadoo & Hon'bMMr. Synli KumarSinhd *? •% 'I 'I' ^f'lf^ I •"Si i 1 »^wV? Heard Mr. I.S. Sahu, coun The appeilant has prefen compsnsation amount, being October, 2007 passed by 1S! Tribunai, Bilaspur in Ciaim Case <*i'')i<'i<fl'< ^fWvS ^^St tpii«(i< i?ajRn sii^i Guharam, .Sfo Badaku Bhaina, agea' 22 years, R/'o Viilage Loharsi Son Post - Chilhant! Tah- Masturi, District- Biiaspur <C.G.) ii'SUS Namdar Khan, S/o Abbas Khan, R/o infron of Mazar Simga, District - Raipur (C.G.) Rajendra Sethia, S/o Kanmatiji Sethia, aged 55'years Proprietor - Bes-com Transport Company, R/o Heerapur, Raipur (C.G.) Branch Manager, Orlenta! insurance Limited, Branch Dhamtari (C.G.) 3 ofthe Motor Vehicies Act, 1988) |ei for appeiiant. |ed thia appeal for enhancsment of Sgrieved by the award dated 8L" lAdditional i^otor Accident Claims |No. 280/2006, whereby the leamed -HG—78 '3^ •^iww'i, w<S\wi<a, Rjciiyy< 'W^ 200 WI^T'^39; (^pf^^T) an^riirteNT WT3(|^i%in6n- \. ^f wiiw^iteisn^i -•2-- ^Ncltil-t ^IWdf •if.fe^^f5R5R ^aifgH ail^l ribunai has passed an award to fie tune of Rs.21,000/- i.e. ;s.1 ,OOQ/- under medical expens^ uffering, Rs.5,000/- for special dlet |s, Rs.5,000'- under pain & and Rs.10,000/- for sustainini tsri&vous iniuro. In para 13 of the award, the [Tribunal has observed that the :ertificate Ex.P-7 'nas been producjed by the claimant regarding iustaining of 25% temporary dlsabiiiy'. The Tribunal further heid that Ineither certificate has been prodyce. nor any Doctor has been exarnine^ ciaimant has sustained any permaneijit disab'iity. Havlng heard iearned counsei considsred opinion fhat the finding o| 1 regarding permanent disabliity in order to establish that the for the appe'lant, ws are of the the Triisunai is based on sound led to produce lega! & cogent raasoning, as the appeliant has fs evidence in order to establish that h4 sustained permanent disability. Nsither Doctor has been examinesl nor any certificate has bsen produced that.the ciaimant sustajned any permanent dlsabi!ity, therefors, the compensation awardeti by the Tribunai isjust, fair and isonai: !n the resuit, the appeal, 'ow\g devoid of merit, is liabie to be i^r^lss^d ^riri tt is hs^bv riisnnlsssdl in*!l?n!n^ ^ i lW\ii?~*^r^-S ^^i l\^ i iL i-^ 1 3\/l ^ yyf V ^u 1^/U iJi-*^^4*^~»rt| i^ ^ st'^ 3 >5i 9 ^f * Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo ;e Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge