-r'f.J^ IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MISC. APPEAL rC1 N0. ^3> 72009 Wi APPELLANT CLAIMANT <^^1^^ ^^••••^ • '*" FT; 'i • 'f ...,-'yEe;..''•""" %€*•-•• Satish Kumar Khakha, s/o Filmon Khakha, aged about 30 years, Occupation- Service (Assistant Veterinary Area Officer) Veterinary Hospital, Lanjit, P.S. Odgi, District Surguja. At present residing at Vikas Nagar, 27 Kholi, in front of Gumdwara, Ward No.l, P.S. Civil Lines, Bilaspur, Tahsil 8s District Bilaspur (C.G.). VERSUS 1. Rajesh Kumar Soni, s/o Gulab Prasad Soni, aged about 32 years, R/o Jur, P.0. Basdei, P.S. Surajpur, District Surguja (C.G.) 2. Ganesh Singh s/o Dasharam, aged about 25 years, caste- Gond, R/o village- Ketka, P.S. Surajpur, District Surguja (C.G.). 3. Branch Manager, Reliance General Insurance Company Limited, F.S.-16 block "C" Mansarowar, commercial complex Habibganj, near Railway station, Bhopal (M.P.) MISC. APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLEACT, Claimed Amount 5.50.000/- Claim Award - 25.000/- RESPONDENTS (Driver) OWNER INSURER COMPANY HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH Coram : HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHR! T.P. SHARMA, J. APPELLANT CLAIMANT RESPONDENTS COMPANY .A. (ClNo. 243 of 2009 Satish Kumar Khakha, s/o Filmon Khakha, aged about 30 years, Occupation - Service (Assistant Veterinary Area OfRcer) Veterinary Hospitat, Lanjit, P.S. Odgi, Distrfct Surguja. At present residing at Vikas Nagar, 27 Kholi, in front of Gurudwara, Ward No.1, P.S. Civil Lines, Bilaspur, Tahsil & District Bilaspur (C.G.). Versus 1. Rajesh Kumar Soni, s/o Gulab (Drivert Prasad Soni, aged about 32 years, R/o Jur, P.0. Basdei, P.S. Surajpur, District Surguja (C.G.) OWNER 2. Ganesh Singh, s/o Dasharam, aged about 25 years, caste- Gond, R/o village - Ketka, P.S. Surajpur, District Surguja (C.G.) INSURER 3. Branch Manager, Rellance Generaf Insurance Company Limited, F.S. - 16 block "G" Mansarowar, commercial complex Habibganj, near Raitway Station, Bhopal (M.P.) tiSCELLANEOUS APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT Present: Shri D.C. Verma, fearned counsel for the appellant. ORDER (02nd March, 2009) The foltowing order of the Court was passed by l, C.J,: r Shri D.C. Verma, learned counsel for the appeltant is heard on admission. 2) Appellant - Satish Kumar Khakha is seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the 6th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 29.11.2008, passed in Claim Case No.69/2008. 3) As against the compensation of Rs.5,50,000/- claimed by appellanVclaimant - Satish Kumar Khakha by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 13.04.2007, the Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.25,000/- along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 4) Shri D.C. Verma, learned counse! for the appellant vehemently argued that the compensation of Rs.25,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is too low in comparison to the serious nature of the injuries sustained by the appellant/claimant in the motor accident. 5) For the reasons best known to the appellant/claimant, no doctor was examined before the Tribunal to establish the nature of the injuries said to have been sustained by the appellant/claimant in the motor accident and the fact that those injuries resulted in any permanent disability. 6) In this state of evidence, we do not find any scope for enhancement ofthe compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 7) The appeal flled by the appellant/claimant for enhancement of the compensation, therefore, is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed summarily. —— Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge subbu ^- r-