1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL NO. 11 OF 2005 Chandrabhan s/o. Rangnath Nemane, Age 48 yrs., Occu. Agriculture & Business, R/o. Khadak Waghalgaon, Tq. Gangapur, Dist. Aurangabad. ....Appellant. Versus 1. Bashir s/o. Dulekhan Pathan (Dismissed as per order dt. 20.4.2009) 2. Satish s/o. Changdeorao Kokate, Age Major, Occu. Business, R/o. Handewadi, Tq. Kopargaon, Dist. Ahmednagar. 3. The Divisional Manager, The Orient Insurance Company Ltd. Adalat Road, Aurangabad ....Respondents. Shri. B.V. Dhage, Advocate for the appellant. Shri. A.R. Borulkar, Advocate for the respondent No. 2. Mr. K.T. Shirurkar, Advocate for respondent No. 3. CORAM : K.U. CHANDIWAL J. DATE : 4th May, 2010 ORAL JUDGMENT : 1. Heard. Admit. Heard finally. Record perused. The claimant 46 2 years old questions the award dated 15.7.2004 recorded by learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Aurangabad for an amount of Rs. 1,00,400/- as against his desire of Rs. 3,00,000/-. 2. The claimant on the fateful day, came in contact with the offending Ambassador Car No. MM-17/G-340, while claimant was plying the motorcycle with his daughter in law. The impact of the accident, according to him, is such that the claimant suffered several injuries. Medical report illustrate that the claimant suffered (1) coll in fracture over right wrist (2) displaced fracture acertbulam (3) fracture lower third fibula right and (4) fracture, tibia right. According to him, by virtue of the above accident, the claimant is not able to follow his pursuit and suffered 70% permanent disability. 3. It is the matter of record, in a case where the claimant asserts 70% permanent disability, it was obligatory for him to have put forth the evidence of medical officer. The Medical Officer is not examined. Only medical certificate and discharge cards are proved at Exhs. 62 and 63 produced with the list. There is no quarrel about the petitioner/claimant, sustaining the injuries. It may be that he was operated twice and was indoor patient for 20 days. 4. The learned Judge analysed the evidence coupled with the bills produced by the claimant and also gave thought to the age of the 3 claimant to be 46 years. He has agricultural yields, mental trauma that he has suffered and the loss of his earning. The claimant, consequently was entitled to receive an amount of Rs. 1,00,400/-. These observations of the learned Judge are certainly based on rational calculations as shown in para 15 and 16 of the order under challenge. The view taken by the learned Judge is in tune with the available record. The bills which were produced by the claimant were indeed considered and award also incorporated the same. No interference. First Appeal lacks merit. Dismissed with civil application, if any. [ K.U. CHANDIWAL J.] ssc/fa11.05