^ T HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAWI: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J. Misc. Appeal (C) No. 1056 of 2011 € Appellant Claimant Respondents Non-applicants Naval Das, s/o Dholdas Manikpuri, aged about 20 years, r/o Khokhari, police-^station Shivrinarayan, dist. Janjgir C.G. VERSUS Santosh Mahto, s/o late Hardev Mahto, r/o village Chutiya, thana Chutiya, district Ranchi (Jharkhand) Vinod Pandey, s/o unknown, r/o Bhanpuri, Raipur, distt. Raipur C.G, Regional Manager, Bajaj Alliance General Insurance Company Ltd., Raipur, distt. Raipur C.G. Memo^of appeal under Section 173 of nflotor Vehicle Act Present: Shri Samir Singh, counsel for the appellant. ORDER >th (19°10ctober,2011) The following order of '-Vne Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. ,lf~ Shri Samir Singh, learned counsel learned counsel for the appellant is heard on admission. '-.•i M.A.C. No. 1056 of2011 2) Appellant/ claimantNaval Das is seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the 4 Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 30.08.2011, passed in Claim Case No.46/2011. 3) As against the compensation of Rs.5,21,000/- claimed by appellant/claimant Naval Das, by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 16.02.2009, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.17,000/- as compensation to the claimant along with interest @ 6% perannum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 4) Shri Samir Singh, learned counsel for the appellant vehemently argued that the Tribunal has erred in awarding low compensation of Rs.17,000/- only though the appellant/ claimant sustained multiple serious injuries including fractures in the motor accident resulting in permanent disability to the extent of20%. 5) Claimant Naval Das was aged about 20 years on the date of the accident. It is true that the claimant sustained fracture of his right tibia bone in the motor accident, but the Tribunal in para 35 of the impagned award has recorded a positive finding that after treatment the claimant did not suffer functional disability and as such there was.pa loss^m his future earning capacity. We further gather that the bills and vouchers produced by the claimant before the Tribunal in regard to the expenses incurred on his treatment were to the extent of Rs.2,000/- on'y and the .f' Tribunal has awarded Rs.5,000/- towards medica! expenses. w a/0-- M.A.C. No. 1056 of 2011 subbu V 6) On due consideration of the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant and the above-mentioned broad features of the case, we are satisfied that the compensation of Rs.17,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case and does not call for any enhancement in this appeal. 7) As we do not find any scope for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appeal filed by the appellant/ claimant for enhancement of the compensation, fails and is hereby dismissed summarily. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge <'*- /./