Y ^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT M.A.mNO.S'7 /SQ^>. sii ^yj •'^ 061ia8i;H APPELLANT: Kamlesh Sonker^Aged 35Y^ai^ S/o Jayaati Sonker, R/o Ward.No. 23, camp-2 Bhilai, District Durg(C.G) VESSUS ^l SPONDENTS z" ^' ,' ./ <^" ^0"'^ ^•'\/\^ ^</'^ ^% /^^) /.^ 1.. Kailash@ Maniram S/o /' Baisakhulal Chandraker, R^ Bhaisbeed ( Mahka) Post Phunda, Police Station Mungeli, District Bilaspur ( Driver Of Offending Vehicle Mahittdrs Bolero Reg. no.MP26/TR/373) 2. Pumnik Chandrakef S/o Parasram Chandraker, R/o Post: Nanpuri, Police Station Pandaria^ Disfa-ict Kawardha (C.G) ( Owner ofoffendmg vehicle Mahmdra Bolero Reg. no.MP26/TR/373) ^ ^" ^'3; The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Through :Regional Manager Malviya Nagar, Chowk, Durg (Insurance Company of offending vehicle Mahmdra Bolero Reg. no.MP26/TR/373) APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF MQTOR VEHICLE ACT XI-HC-78 *11*1CTT»»*1|cb 3^ '<1|<q|<n-i4, ^Tft^'lfi, j^dl^^< ^;.M:&.^o..£.7/'^ ®? 2QO ^T<<^«b(li?*U<s*^) w^T^rf^Tt^ cT8n'3:rT^T$b^i<=t- ^cTTW^cT^TT^T ^Wfe^ WToff ^*te^ ^R^K ^3Tf^T3:n^T 15.01.2007 Shri Anurag Jha, Couns< Heardon admission. The appeliant is aggrie^ by the Xth Additional Motor A<| Durg (C.G.) in Ciaim Case compensation of Rs.31,978/- application tiil the recovery was| Shri Anurag Jha. iearne^ iearned Claims Tribuna! ought| suffered 10% permanent disal that the compensation awarde^ and reasonable compensatior appeal. Learned counsei for th|' the statements of the ciaimant iearned Claims Tribunai w'nich Learned counsel for information report and oth^ established that the claimant therefore compensation awai| inadequate. Having heard iearned 4 claimant did not fiie the X-Ra^ Ciaims Tribunal and treatingl ciaimant. So far as the tesli concerned, he was not the trej 28-02-2006 whereas the accidi ji for the appellant. led by an award dated 26.06.2006 passed tcident Claims Tribunai, (F.T.C.), District- (sio.145/2005 whereby in an injury case |a!ong interest @ 6% from the date of (awarded. counsei for the appellant argued that the |to have considered that the ciaimant had |>i!ity in hls right ank!e and therefore prays by the learned Claims Trihunal is notjust and deserves to be enhanced in this |e appellant has furnished certified copy of and Dr. Akhilesh Yadav recorded by the iretakenonrecord. |the appeliant submitted that the first documents proved by the ciaimant had suffered permanent dlsability and ded by the iearned Ciaims Tribunal is •f.- ''• )unsel for the appeliant, it is seen that the report before the iearned Motor Accident Doctor was a!so not examined by the imony of Dr. Akhiiesh Yadav A.W.-2 is rtlng Doctor and examined the ciaimant on lent occurred on 16-04-2005. Dr. Akhiiesh iiin FT^ XI-HC-78 ^n^T^rf^TW cT2TT3TT^T$h^I<^ 'TI^&^ «<TR<<TrSh+lich 75ET "41<41<r1<<, ($Tf1^<l<o, fc|diy^< nra; M:k^Uo.S.7/.'^ 200 3TT^?rq^T (^cli^sJ^tST) ^Rn'W^cr^TT^T Yadav, A.W.-2 has admitted to give opinion whether the i( sustained by the claimant in tll Considering the evit abovementioned facts, ! ^i compensation of Rs.31,978/-) cannot be faulted with. !n the result, this Mil devoid of merit and is dismissfed chi^^41Ti ^i^^T^:tel^t<f^<^i< ^3rf^T3:n^T n his cross-examination that he was unabie ijury in the right ankle of the claimant was e accident. dence led by the claimant and the m of the considered opinion that the awarded by the learned Ciaims Tribunai >ce!laneous Appeal (C) No.57/2007 being at the stage of admlssion. aip^»sah*Deshmukh Judge Ditip P.T.O.