^ h"^ COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT DiySSION.BENCH RAJEEV GUPTA, CJ. SUNJL J. ADDeilant Cialmant Respondents Non-sppSIcants »11(» Mssc. Appeaj No.933/2006 Seema Sharma, VV/o Akash Sharma, sged about 29 years, R/o House No.296, Shajlendra Nagar PS Civii Llne, Ralpur . Ruman Kumar Sinha, S/o Revaram Slnha, aged about 30 years, Occupation - Driver, R/o C/o Satyak Distributors TEigharii Naka Statlon Road Raipur (CG) Rajkumar Gadodiya, S/o JVJadhohari Gadodlya, aged about 34 years Occupation Satyak Distributors Telghani Naka Ststion Road Raipur (CG) Division Manager, The OPriental Insurance Company Ljmjted, Divlsjon No.1, Madina Manjil Jaii Rba, Raipur (CG) Mlsc. under Section 173 ofthe MototVsh|d6S_Act Present : Shri SC Verma, counsei for fhe appeiiants. Shri Sudhlr AgravvaS, counssf for respondent No.3. (18m August, The foliowing order of the Court wss passed by Gupta, C.J. 2 ^., Learned counsel for the partles are heard on MCP No. 1290/2006, a petitlon for condonation of the delay in fiiing the appeal. 2) On due consideration of the submissions of learnedcounsel for the appeilant and the grounds taken in the application, we are satisfied that the appellant has succeeded in showing sufficient cause for the delay in fl!ing the appeaj. 3) MCP No.1290/2006, therefore, is aliowed and the deiay in filing the appea! is hereby condoned. 4) Shri SC Verma, learned counsel for the appeliant is heard on admission. 5) Appeiiant Seema Sharma Is seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the 10th Motor Accident Ciaims Tribunal, Raipur (for short, "the Trlbunai") vide award dated 28.04.2005, passed in Ciaim Case No.92/2004. 6) As against the compensation of Rs.10,65,000/- claimed by the appeliant/claimant by filing a claim petltion under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for the Injuries sustained by her in the motor accldent on 27.01.2004, the Tribuna! awarded a total sum of Rs.94,000/- as compensation along wlth interest @ 9% per annum from the date of fiiing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment, on the insurer's failure to pay the compensation to the claimants withln one month from the passing ofthe award. 7) Shri SC Verma, iearned counse! for the appeiiant vehemently argued that the Tribuna! has erred i awarding low compensation of RS.94,000/- only. K** 8) From the impugned award it appears that, though the claimant examined herself In support of her clsim before the Tribunai, the medicai certificate and dJsability certificate were not proved by the Doctors, who had Issued those certiflcates. 9) That apart, the compensation of Rs.94,000/- awarded by the Tribuna! when examined in the context of the nature of the Jnjuriss said to have been sustained by the appeltant /claiman? in the motcr accldent, we are satisfied, does not cail for any enhancement in this appeal. 10) The appeal filed by the appetlant/claimant for enhancement of the compensation, therefore, is iiable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed summarily. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge padma