Miscellaneous Appeal under Section 1?3 of Motor Vehicle Act ‘ Rresent .: \ j wt x GH COUR OF HHATTISG BILASPUR DimswN BEN¢H ‘ Coram : HON’BLE SHRI RAJIEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON’BLE SHR! SUNIL KUNIAR SINHA, J. , 1 Misc. Appeai (C) No. 1&5 or zoas : Basant Kama!“ Vaishnav Slo Baldau Dasi‘‘ aged about 32 years, occupationi— Labaurer resident of village Méro, Tahsi! f Nawagarh, District Durg (C.G.) Versus Fulsai Gupta Sic Samay> Lat Gupta, aged 42 years, Occupation — Driver, :R/e Viuage Rajendra Nagar, Biiaspur, District Bilaspur (C‘G.) 1. RESPONDENTS arjinder Singh SID HarvanS H h Sir‘rgh, age 45 years, occupatiah Business (Owner of vehicie) R/o village Tellbandha, Raipur, District aipur (C.G.) Branch Manager! United lndia nsurance Ccmpany Limited, Branch Office Korba Stadium, & T.P. Nagar,‘ P.S. and Tahsil District Korba (C.G.) Nares‘h Kumar wro not known. Surjeet Singh S/o not known aged 65 years, Bothx are through Jeevan Bus Services, Pandri, Bus Stand, Raipur, near Hora Complex, Raipur (C.G.) insurance Company, the Orie‘nial insurance Company, Jail ’ Road Kachahari Chowk, Raipurr(C.C§\.‘) '3 " Shri Vimlesh Bajpai, learned counselior the appeiiant. HI T CARH AT APPELLANT « R i , KK‘ None for respondents No. 1, Q, 4 & 5. e Shri H.B. Agrawal, learned Senior Counsel with Shri Pankaj ‘Agrawal, learned cou nsel for respondent No.3‘ Shri Ajay Mishra, learned counsel for respondent No.6. ‘ ' 3 ’ l ORDER§ (11m May, 200$) The following order of the :Court was passed by Raieev Gupta, C.J.: r' Learned counsel for the parties aErs heard on M.C.P. No. 1577I2006, ‘a petition for condonation of the delay? in filing the appeaL' 2. On due consideration ofthe submissions of learned counsel for the parties and the grounds taken in the application, M.C.P. No. 157f/2QO6 is allowed and the delay of 16 days in filing the appeal is hereby condoned. 3‘. L Shri Vimlesh Bar’pai, learned counsel for the appellant is l heard on admission. i I 4. Appellant Basant Kumar Vaishnav, is seeking enhancement , of the compensation awarded by the Additional Motor Accident l Claims Tribunal, Bemetara, District Durg (for short ‘the Tribunal’) vicie award dated 24.04.2006, passed in Claim Case No1 19/2004. 5. As against the compensation of Rs.3,65,000/— claimed by the appellant! claimant by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Actfor the injuries sustained by him‘a’in’the motor accident on 24.06.2004, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of ' R’s.23,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 6°43 per annum nlmml l ‘ 4 from the date of filing of the‘ claim pet;ition tiH thg date of actual payment. § 7 t 6. Shri Vimlesh Bajpai, learned c‘punse! far the appellant L vehemently argued that the Tribunal has erred in awarding low i compensation of Rs.23!000/- only though the appellant/ claimant sustained serious injuries in the motor aocident. y 7. For the reasons best known to the appellant l claimant no doctor was examined before the Tribunal to establish the nature of the injuries said to have been sustained by the appellanti claimant in the motor accident and the fact that those injuries resulted in any permanent disability. 8. in this state of evidence, we do not find any scope for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 9. The appeal, therefore, is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed summarily. ' /\ Sci/— i Sd/- 1 Sunit Kumal‘ Sinha Chief Justice Judge a