.^>- HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH ATBILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: APPELLANT CLAIMANT HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINHA, J. M.A.(CtNo.1301of2008 Daulat Chelak, S/o Tijauram Chelak, aged about 50 years, Caste - Satnami, R/o ViHage-Nayapara, Bavankera, Occupation Choukidar (Forest Department), Police Station Tumgaon, Tahsil and District Mahasamund (C.G.) Versus 1. Niranjan Singh Rajput, S/o Pradeep Singh, aged about 27 years, R/o Village- Pateva, Pollce Station Tumgaon, Tahsil and District Mahasamund (C.G.) 2. The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Through : The R^ional Manager, The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Raipur (C.G.) Memo of Appeal Under Sectton 173 of the Motor Vehides Act. 1988 RESPONDENTS Present: Shri P.P. Sahu, leamed counsel for the appellant. ORDER (25th September, 2008) The fotlowing order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. Shri P.P. Sahu, leamed counsel for the appejlant Is heard onadmission. 2. Appellant/Claimant Daulal Chelak is seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the First Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mahasamund (for shcrt "the Tribunal") vide award dated 18-06-2008, passed in Claim Case No.35/2007. SiBSSWi j -f-' ^ ^g^J1' •s.?ss^'y 3. As against the compensation of Rs. 4,00,000/- claimed by appellant/claimant Daulal Chelak by filing a ctaim petitlon under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 25-12-2006, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.'[9,823- as compensation alongwith interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing ofthe claim petition till the date of actual payment. 4. Shri P.P. Sahu, leamed counsel for the appellant vehemently argued that the Tribunal has erred in awarding low compensation of Rs.19,822/- only, though the claimant sustained multiple serious injuries and fractures resulting in permanent disability to the extent of 50%. 5. For the reasons best known to the claimant himself, no doctor was examined before the Tribunal to establish that the injuries sustained by the claimant in the motor accident resulted in any permanent disability. 6. In this state of evidence, we do not find any infirmity in the impugned award whereby the Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.19,822/- to the claimant. 7. As we do not flnd any scope for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunat, the appeal flled by the appetlant for enhancement of the compensation is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed summarily^ s<v- Chief Justice Sd/- SunaKumarSinha Judge padmS