:/^l^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF_JUDLCATURE OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR APPELL.^NT (CLAIMANT) f^ -yss-^ ..--^'i^3^ ^ •-w^vv •^ " _..-'ly RESPONDENTS : M.A.(C.) No...^'.^.-s..../2010 Ku. F'ushpa Sahu, aged about 21 years, D/o Manbodh Ram Sahu, R/o Street of Seema Interprises Main Road, Ashwani nagar, P.S. Purani Basti, Tah& District Raipur •(C.G.) Versus \ 2) ^ 3) k Mohammad Irshad @ Banti aged about 29 years, S/o Mo. Ishak R/o Noorani Chowk, Nawapara P.S. City Kotwali Tahsil & District Mahasamund (C.G.) (Driver of Alleged Truck bearing Registration No. C.G.04-J/1450) Prakash Ajmani aged about 37 years, S/o Hanjraj Ajmani, R/o Station Para Ward No.9 Mahasamund, P.S. Mahasamund Tahsil 8s District Mahasamund (C.G.) (Owner of Alleged Truck bearing Registration No. C.G.04- J/1450) The New India Insurance Company Limited, Divisional Office No.2, Raipur Tahsil &, District Raipur (C.G.) (Insurer of Alleged Truck bearing Registration No. C.G.04- J/1450) L MEMO OF MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 gF^MOTOR_VEHlCLE_ACT 1988 . FOR ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION AWARD -L. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M.A. (C) No. 1035/2010 APPELLANT Ku. Pushpa Sahu Versus RESPONDENTS Mohamn'iad Irshad and others Banti SB:- HON'BLE SHRI N.K. AGARWAL.J PRESENT:- Shri C.K. Sahu, Advocate, for the appellant. Shri Adhiraj Surana, Advocate for the respondent No. 2. Shri Deepak Gupta, Advocate, fqr the respondent No. 3. ORAL ORDER (10-3-2011) 1. Heard on I.A. no. 1, application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. 2. On due consideration, the appellant has succeeded in explaining the cause of delay in filing the appeal. Therefore, the application is allowed and delay is condoned. 3. With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally. ,4. This is claimants appeal seeking enhancement of compensation in the award dated 25-6-2010 passed by the 7th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur whereby an amount of Rs. 3,12,070/- has been awarded along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum till its . recovery in favour of the appellant/claimant and against the respondents, as against Rs. 4,50,000/- claimed by the appellant for permanent disability and the injuries sustained by her in the accident dated 21-10-2008. Learned Tribunal on due appreciation of the evidence led, material placed and submissions made, awarded Rs. 3,12,070/.-. The Tribunal awarded Rs. 1,50,000/- as against Rs. 2,00,000/- claimed on account of permanent ^ f> 1 :^..vy disability; Rs. 50,000/- for pains and sufferings; Rs. 50,000/- for future treatment against Rs. 75,000/- claimed. So far as actual medical expenses is concerned, although fhe claimant claimed Rs. 1,00,000/-, but based on documents produced by the claimant, the Tribunal awarded Rs. 57,070/-. 6 . Shri C.K. Sahu, leaned coiinsel for the appellant would submit, the Tribunal has erred in awarding low compensation on the head of medical expenses. 7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents supported the award and would submit that in fact, the impugned award passed by the Tribunal is on higher side. 8. The Tribunal has awarded Rs. 57,070/- on account of medical expenses which is based on the documents produced by the appellant and also Rs. 50,000/- towards future medical expenses, whereas ti.ie appellant failed to examine the treating doctor and the doctor examined by the claimant has not treated her. Rather, the doctor has stated in his statement that he never treated her and after completion of her treatment, he has only issued certified based on photocopy of discharge ticket. 9. Considering above fact and considering the fact that the amount awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable, I do not find any scope of enhancement in the amount awarded by the Tribunal. 10. The appeal being devoid of substance deserves to be and is hereby dismissed. ^ Sd/- N-K. Agarwal Judge