-%,. /C1 '^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Coram: Hon' ble Shri T.P. Sharma & Hon' ble Shri R.N. Chandrakar, JJ Misc.ADpeal fCl No. 1184 of 2010 Appellant Respondents. Vs. Kamal Ram Mahar, s/o. Ramchandra Mahar, aged about 40 years, r/o. Shankarpur, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon (CG). 1. Shekhchandra s/o. Shekh Ahmed, aged about 42 years, r/o. Akodiroad, Sakoli, District Bhandra (Maharashtra). 2. Sanjay Kumar Goudhani, s/o. Khushram, r/o. Plot No. 207, Gurunanak Nagar, DistrictNagpur (Maharashtra). 3. National Insurance Company Limited through the Branch Manager, Branch KamthiLine, Rajnandgaon (CG). (Misc. Appeal u/S. 173 of theMotor Vehicle Act, 1988) Present: Shri Avinash Chand Sahu, counsel for the appellant. ORAL ORDER (2-12-2010) PerT.P. Sharma.J. 1. Heard. 2. This appeal under Section. 173 of the Motot Vehicle Act, 1988 is directed against the award dated 7-7-2010 passed by Ist Additional MotorAccident Claims Tribunal (for short, "the Tribunal") Rajnandgaon in Claim Case No. 30/2009. The present appeal is filed with delay of 24 days. 3. Also heard on I.A.No.1, application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal and also on admission. 4. Perused the memo of appeal and the impugned award of the Tribunal. 5. As against the compensation of Rs.5,80,000/- claimed by the appellanVclaimant by filing claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for the injuries sustained by him in the motor ^. ""^^&'^c''r 8. 9. 10. 11. ^3 accident on 11-7-2008, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.54,600/- as compensation to the claimant along with interest of 7.5% perannum. Learned counsel appearing for the appeliant submits that the Tribunal has erred in awarding low compensation of Rs.54,600/- only though the appellant/claimant sustained multiple serious injuries including fracture in the motoraccident resulting permanent disability. For the reasons best known to the appellant/ claimant, no treating doctor was examined by him before the Tribunal toestablish the nature of the injuries said to have been sustained by him in the motor accident and the fact that the said injuries resulted in permanent disabjlity to the extent of 40%. From perusal of paras 7and 11 ofthe impugned award, we gather that though the appellant/claimant has not filed any substantive document of treatment but the Tribunal has awarded Rs.10,000/- on account of expenditure for treatment. The Tribunal has taken liberal view in awarding Rs.54,600/- on account of injurie.sustained by him. In these circumstances, I.A.No.1, application is allowed and delay in filing the instant appeal is condoned. For the reasons mentioned above, we do not find any scope for enhancement ofthe compensation awarded by the Tribunai. Accordingly, the appeal is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed at the motion stage itself, notwithstanding that it is barred by time. Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge Raji.