^^. ^S.J HIGH CQURT OFCHHATTISGARHA^'BH.ASPUR Sinaie Bench : Hon'bie Shri Diiio Raosaheb Deshmukh. J. Appellant Wiisc^ApDeai SC) No.41/2008 Jayant Kumar Devtale, S/o Shri V.P.Devtale, aged about 27 years, R/o 2/7, Housing Board, industrial Area, P.0. & P.S. Jamul, Distt. Durg (C.G.), Now R/o Sector-11, P.S. Chauni, P.0. Bhiiai, Distt. Durg (C.G.) Versys 1. Basant Chauhan, S/o Thukel Thakurram Chauhan, aged about 26 years, Caste Chauhan, R/o Villag® Chhattisgarh Nagar, Tikrapara, Po'ice Station, Tikrapara, Tahsil & Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 2. Smt. Santoshi Bai Agrawal, W/o Shri Vishnudayal Agrawai, R/o Viliage Ashwani Nagar, Raipur, Tahsil & Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 3. The National |nsurance Company Ltd. Through : The Divisiona! Manager, & Office of the National Insurance Company Ltd. G.E. Road, Raipur (C.G.) Appea! u/s 173 ofthe IVIotor Vehicle Act. 1988 Present : Smt. Meera Jaiswal, counsel for the appeliant. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 14th March, \. Aggrieved by the order dated 29.09.2007 passed by 9th Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (F.T.C.), Durg (C.G.) (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal) in Claims Case No. 34/2007 whereby a sum of Rs.47,166/- as compensation, the appellant has preferred this appea! for enhancement. 2. Heard. 3. In this appeal for enhancement for compensation, it was urged by Smt.Meera Jaiswal, learned counsel for the appellant that the Tribunai has '- •2- f'M Sfe> 1 not considered expenses incurred in the treatment vide Ex.P.76 which is a certificate issued by the Bhilai Engineering Corporation, Unit-11 where the c!aimant was employee. To this Certificate, a list of medical expenses incurred by the claimant was also attached. It is not disputed that the claimant did not produce the bilis mentioned in the list and a!so did not adduce any medica! evidence. The claimant admitted in paragraph 14 that he did not sustain any permanent disability due to ttie accident. !t was also admitted by the claimant in his statement before the tribunaithat he was not undertaking any treatment for injuries sustained by him in the accident and that he had not fi!ed any document to show that there was Soss of memory due to the acctdent. 4. !n view of the fact that the claimant did not adduce any medicai evidence and did not file any document to substantiate the fact of permanent disability sustained in the accident, no ground for ehhancement ofcompensation awarded bythe Tribunal is made out. 5. The appea! being devoid of any merit is dismissed at the stage of admisslon. --~ - ——- -_-. _ Sd/- Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh Juslge \: