^t -^^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISQARH: BILASPUR Single Bench: ARpeltent Hon'bte Shri Djfip Raosaheb Deshmukh. J. Responctents M.A.C. No. 1218 of2008 Daljeet Singh, S/o Indrajeet Singh, aged about 25 yeare, R/o Satluj Transport Co., Transport Nagar Hathkhoj, P.S. Purani Bhilaijehsil & Distt. Durg(CG) Versus 1. Balitor Singh Sainl. S/o Hamam Singh, aged about 63 yeare, R/o HIG-2194, M.P. Housing tx>ard. Industrial Area Bhilai, Distfc Duig (CG) OvmeroftheVehfcle 2. The Dwisional Manager, The New Indta Insurance Co., G.E. Road, Poww House Bhilai, Distt. Durg (CG) Inwifw Miscellaneous appeal underSection 173 QftheMotorVeliidesAct 1988 Present: Shri P.R. Patanteir with Shri Ashish Surana, counsel for the appellant ORALORDER (Passed on 16.09.2008) Heard onsdmission. (2) This »s a claimarrt's appeal for enhancement of comj^nsation awarded bythe ll"d Acfclitional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (henceforth the 'Tribunal') Durg in claims case No.06/2008 vide awatd cteted 00/07jQCK)8. (3) On an application under Section 163(A) of the Motor Vehictes Act for permanent disability suffered by the claimant who was driving the Tata tndica bearing No.CG-07-ZD 5444 (henceforth the 'Vehicte'), the Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.1,34,838/- e^ainst the restXMXtent No.l/owner of the said vehiole while exonerating the insurer from the liabillty to pay compensatjon. (4) Leamed coureel for the appellant urged two grounds in this appeat. Firstly, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side and secondly, the Tribunal ought not to have exonerated the insumr from tte liabitity to pay compensation in view of the fact that the premium for owner cumdriverwas received bythe insurer (5) Having conskJered the sufanissfons of the teamed counsel fw the appellant, 1 have perused the impugned award. The aocident had occurred on 18.1.2005. The claimant did notexamine the treating ctoctor but examir a1^-^ .—-2 Dr. Akhilesh Yadav (AW-2) who had examined the claimant far the first time after more than 3 yeare i.e. on 30.3.2008. The Trtbunat has awarded the compensation underthe following heads:- 1) Towards expenses incurred during hospitalization 2) Towards expenses incurred in purchase ofmedicin^ 3) Towards special diet 4) Tovt»rdscost of conveyance 5) Towards expenses towards attendant 6) Towards pain & suffering 7) Towards loss of future earning Total Rs.lS.OOO/- Rs.10,638/- Rs. 3,000/- Rs. 3,000/- Rs. 3,000/- Rs. 5,000/- Rs.95^00/- Rs.1,34^38/- (6) In wew of the fact that the claimant did not tead any medical evidence to show actual injuries sustained by him tn the accident, I am of the considered opjnion that compensation awarcted by the Tribunal is just and reasonable compensation and does not call for enhancement. (7) As regards the last ground, the learned counsel for the appellant dtel not dispute that premium had been received by the insurance company covering the risk of the owner cum driver. It is atso not in cttspute that the claimant was not a driver engaged by the owner, but was a friend of ttie owner who was driving the Vehicte. (8) In this view of the matter, the Tribunal has rightly exonerat^J tte insurer while fastening liability on the owner. (9) There is no merit in this appeal, which is accordingly dismissed at e stage of admission. Priya Sd/- Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh Judge u