ss*a's^. <s^ -^ ^•jfefffS^ S &^ H!GH COURT OF CHHATTiSGARH AT BILASPUR Sinaie Bench : Hon'bie Shri Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh. J. ApDeiiant Ciaimant Respondents Non-Claimant Miscellaneous Appeat ( ClNo,310%008 Ajay Kumar Dubey S/o Late Mohan Prasad Dubey, Aged about 49 years, Occupation Service R/o Vidya Nagar, Amalideeh, Thana Rajendra Nagar, Tahsil and District Raipur (C.G.) Versus 1. Indrajeet Yadav S/o Lakhan Yadav, aged about 27 years, Occupation: Vehicle Driver, R/o Super Rui Bhandar Ke Baju Gali, Katora Talab, Raipur, Tahsil and District Raipur (C.G.) 2. N. L. Mourya, S/o Triveni Mourya, R/o F-90, Risali Sector, Bhilai, Tahsil and District Durg (C.G.) 3. The National Insurance Coropany Limited, Through: Divisional Manager, Divisional Office, Mobin Mahal, G.E.Road, Raipur(C.G.) MtscellaneQUS appeal underSection 173ofthe|VlotorVehiclesAct, Prssent : Shri O. P. Yadav, counsel for the appeliant. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 07th March, 2008) Heard on I.A.No. 1/2008, which is an application for condonation of deiay of07 days in filing this appeal. (2) For the reasons mentioned in the application, it is allowed and the delay in filing this appeal is condoned. (3) Heard on admission. (4) , The appellant is aggrieved by an award dated 29-09-2CX37 passed by the Xth Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, F.T.C., Raipur (henceforth 'the MACT") in Claim Case No.08/2007 whereby in a persona! injury case.compensation of Rs.68,014/- was awarded. s'&._^-.. ^ I K3'°!S.S-. I ":-'-"^:!i S v.->/-^ SA^ Tumane (5) Shri O. P. Yadav, learned counsel for the appellant did not dispute that the claimant did not suffer from any permanent disabillty due to the accident. It was also not disputed that the ciaimant did not adduce medical evidence before the MACT. The sole point urged by teamed counsel for the appellant is that the compensation awarded by the MACT is on the lower side and it should be enhanced. (6) Having considered the submission of learned counsel for the appellant, ! have perused the impugned award. 1 am of the considered opinion that in view of the fact that no permanent disability was caused and the appellant/claimant did not adduce medical evidence before the MACT, the compensation awarded by the MACT cannot be faulted with. (7) In the result, this appeal being devoid of merit is dismissed at the stage of admission. ~—^ 37^ Judge 'x