-(^ "i I-sj ^ CC--'i—'T3 Arising from district .0;^N >'L^.y!:" ..?>J^:.-- ^'CA^ ^^^^ fc^^C, Gulam Quasim, aged 45 years, son of Shri Gulam (2) Seikh Sameer Quasim, son of Shri Gulam Quasim, (Owner) are residents of Churiyarapara, Nagri, talldes Dhamtari (C.G.). o ^ HIGH COURT OF CHHAmSGARH AT BLLASPUR MA.(C)J<p. 1046 of 2007 APPELLANT: Mukesh Sahu -Versus- RESPONDENTS: Gulam Quasira & others Present Shri Jai Shankar Pandey, counsel for the appellant. Shri Adil Minhaj, counsel for respondents No.l and 2. Single Bench: Hon'ble Shri Prashant Kuinar Mishra, J. ORAL ORDER (21-6-2011) 1. The appeal is barred by 480 days. An application for condonation of delay has been moved to which no reply has been filed by the respondents. 2. On due consideration, prayer for condonation of delay is allowed and delay in filing the appeal is condoned. 3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant on adraission. 4. Appellant Mukesh Sahu aged about 23 years moved the claim petition before the Claims Tribunal under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act to claim compensation of Rs.3,01,000/- on account of injuries suffered by him in the accident involving Kawasaki motorcycle bearing registration No.CG-05/8361 belonging to respondent No.2 which was driven by respondent No. 1 at the relevant time. 5. The.appellant, a tailor master, submitted that he used to earn Rs. 150- 200/- per day and because of the accident, he has suffered permanent disability to the extent of 35%, however, certificate of disability has not been proved by examining medical officer who has issued the certificate. 6. In the matter of Rajesh Kumar alias Raju-V. Yudhvir Singh and another {(2008)7 SCC 305}, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that in the absence of medical officer who has issued disability certificate having been examined by the claimant, the factum and percentage of disability .afls!:Ka:'3>»> ^,.^""^ s 'w ^ %^.-// 'B""",.,-''. ^—- Barve ^' cannot be assessed and no reliance can be placed on the said disability certificate. 7. The appellant claimed that he has incurred expenditure of Rs.60,000/- in treatment, however, in para-8 of the award, the Tribunal has found that medical bills submitted and proved in course of enquiry show the expenditure of Rs.17,000/-. This amount has been awarded to the claimant and in addition, an amount of Rs.5,000/- towards pain and suffering and loss of income during the period when he was obtaining treatment has been assessed at Rs.3,000/-. The Claims Tribunal has awarded total compensation of Rs.25,000/-. 8. Since disability certificate has not been proved and actual medical expenditure has been reimbursed and compensated, there rernains no scope for enhancement of the award amount. Consequently, there is no substance in this appeal, which fails and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge