Tumane HIQHCOURTOFCHHATTJSGARHAT^^ Sjngle Bench : Hon?bieShri Djlip Raosaheb Deshmykh, J. Appejiant Clalmant Respondents Non-dajmarsts M. AC<'^o.43S/2006 Nihal Chand son of Shri Moo! Chand Poptani, aged about 60 years, resident of Ganesh Chowk, Dhamtari, Tehsii & District Dhamtari(C.G.) Versys 1. Hem Lal Son of Dhana Ram, ag^j about 44 years, resident of Village Gaogrel (Kotapara) Tehsil & District Dhamtari 2. Lokesh Kumar Soniof Prabhu Daya!, aged about 40 years, resident of behind Krishi Upaj Mandi, Dhamtari, Tehsi! & District Dhamtari (C.G.) 3. The Orientai insurance Company Limited, Ba!ak Chowk, Dhamtari, Tehsii & District Dhamtari (C.Q.) Misceiianeous Appeai under Section 173 ofthe IVIotor Vehictes Act 1988. Present : - Shri Sunil Sahu, counsel for the appeltant. ORALORDER (Passed on this 2nd day of Ssptembsr, 2SS08) . Heard finaiiy. ., (2) Thls is a claimant's appeai for enhancement of compensation, The Add'rtipnal Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Dhamtari, DistrictRaipur (henoeforth "the Tribuna!") has In Ciaim Case No.8/2005 by av/ard dated 30-08-2006 •A. ' awarded compensation of Rs.49,000/- in an injury case. (3) Learned counsel for the appellant did not dispute that due to the acoident, ^ y^^r^ 0^ permanent disabi!jty y^as/caused to the ciaimant Despite this, the Tribunat has a^/arded Rs.25,000/- towards djsabiijty suffered by the oiaimant and has also awarded Rs.19,000/- towards actual expenses incurred in treatment and Rs,5,000/- towards cost of an attendant, pain and suffering etc. (4) I am of the considered opinion that in the facts and circumstances of the case, no ground for enhancement of compensation av^/arded by the Tribuna! ^ made out: (5) Appeal being devoidof merit is dismissed. [ g^ 1 DUip Raosaheb Deshmukh Judge I-