HI&H COURT OF CHH.4mS©ARHAT BILASPUR Ckaimant ! unde Rafesh Kumar Mishrc, S/o. Uniesh Prosaa Mishra aged about 23 yeo.ra, Occupation - Agricujturist Resident c.f V'llage - Knronti, P.S. Bhaiyathcn, T<Asi! Surajpur, Gists'ict &ii"auja (C.6.) Verajs I- ftiitu &as, Son of A*.mtu t?as, aged about 35 yairs, Occupation Serviee C.H.P. CoSliery Siatgsun, P.S. Pmtiypur, Tahsil Surajpur, C)ist?'ict Surguja (C.6.) 2. The Oriental Insuwnce ContpEmy Limited •tiiroush Brw)Ch Manaoer Braneh Office Ambikapur nsar State 'lank of Scdar Road Ambik^tur' Distriet Surguja (C.6.) Section 173 <ff ihe y.otor Vehictes Act) Hon'bie .%r. T.p. Sharma.-Tj Pressnt: J^r.Ashok Kuma?' Shukta, coanse! for the <ypetlait. Mr.Rakesh Pandey, coun^l for re^endent No.l. Mr.Supy-aktBit Mishra, courise! for spondent No-2. (Rassed on 30 June, 2010) 1. By this appecl, 1+»eappefiant hccs chalienged •t+'e tegairty A pr'oprie.ty of the award dated 29.7.2003 passed by •riie Second Additismf Mctor' Accident CiQims Tribuna! (F.T.C-), Surajpur (for- riiort 'Ciairss Tribuncl'), m Metor Accident Claim Case No.S4/2002, whertby teamed Clasms Tribuna! has awarded Rs.3,000/- ns compensation. 2. Brfef facts necosary for' disposal of •the appeel are thot on 3.1.2000 at about 11.1S -i+ie present ^p«liait sustained mjupies on aceount of motor-cycie '"cident whith was rushly tmd negligently driven by re^3»ndent s. t 'W .t js' ^ -I" No.l sind thereby sustained serious injury in his pr'ivate part. Ctcim for- Rs.lS iaeks was filed undsr Section 161 of the AAoto'' Vehicfes Act, 1988. After proyiding opportunity of hea'-mg to the porS'ias, ieomed Cia'ms TribunaJ has awarded fts.3,000/- aiong with 9% pef annum ond e.wnei'ated respondent Na.2 from any iiabiiity. 3. I have heard learned counset for the parffes, perused 1+ae awa>-d mpugned and record of Ihs Claims Tribunaj. 4. Leamed counse! for the npp«!l(mt submits thct whils awerdirig compensction the Ctflims Tribuna! has not cortsidered -fte injuries of 1+ie appeilant and thereby comm'tted iltegality «nidit i^quires r'econsidem'tion. S, On the othe? ha"d, learned counse) for re^ondent No.l supported oward impugned ond submits that the Ctaims Tribunn! has rightfy the compensatio" ies, I 6. In order to cyppecicEte the arguments adytnced on behaff of •ri-.s have examined the r<cord of •the. Cleims Tnbunci- 7. Specifte compensation has been ctaimed by the c^peUait on cK:count of injuries ctused to him 'm motor'-cycte accjdent, but reason bsst known to the appeiloit he has not exomined any doctor ts> prove ths injuries and its gwyittf. L In •rtie absence of such evidence, the Cteims Tribtinal has rlghtiy awarded the compensntion of fts.3,000/- with 9% per- armum. 9. On close scrutiny of the ey'ttence, I do not find any iitegality in the awuni impugned requiring any interference. ConseqLientty, theappeai being deyoid of merit is liabte to be. dism'ssed <md it is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs. Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge