»n'!;";"'""';i"/^^.":' ^38"'n!aa-s ^A. '"*' Q'a-rflm^ 1 '®tt:a:-^ ^ HIQH COURT OF CHHATTiSGARK: Singis Bench: Hon'bie Shri DilSp Raosaheb Dsshmukh, J. M,A.C.No.89of2309 Apoeilant ; Mohanlal Dsvda, S/o Late Roopchsnd Ciajman^ . Davda, aged aboui 45 years, R/o Shri G- Coionv. near Bus Stand. AbhanDU' District Raipur (CG1 Vsrsus Rssoondents : 1. Narendra Kumar, Sahu S/o Shri Non-ciaimants Ramesh Sahu, Occupation Truck Driver^ R/o Bade Ur'a Abhsnpur; near Gas Godown, Tikarapara, Raipur (CG) 2. Shiv Rlcs ivlili ThfQUQh; MsnsclnQ Dirsctor. Shiv Rice Mili, industrlal Ward Dhamtari. Tshsli snd Dlstrict Dhs]"it£fi (CG) 3. The New Ind'a 'nsurance Company Li'-iited Through: Divisionai Manager. Dlvisionai Office No.1, Madeena BuHd'nc!. Kutoherv Chowk. Raipur. Tahsi! & Districf Raipur (CG) Miscelian.sous appeal under Seetion 173 of fhe iVSotor Vehicies Act, •gsss1-^', Present: Shri A.L Sinc''oui, counsel for the appellants. .—?^»» <c^.s5>?^t!'-l—t JB<?,^."i;-^. L.?'f^ U !E" ?''•! (Passed on 23.01.2003) heara on aGmission. (2) Tha sppelianf is sggrieved by an award dated 31.10.2003.p8ssed by the 12'" Addithna] ivlotor Accidents Claims Tribuna; (F.T.C.) (henseforth the 'Tnbura!') Raipur in oiaims case No.25/2003, whereby compensatlon of Rs.3,32,774;- was awardsd to tne appeHanVo'aimanl; for the disabi'lty suffersd bv him ;n the accident. (3) Learned counsei for the appeilant submitted that the assessment QT !oss of yearly inoome by the Tribunal is on the 'ower side and therefore, oompsnsation awsrded fcy the Tribuna! csnnot bs said to be just and ,??nnph'p r"^l^"'sn;3s1";r!r' N.in ^hpr nrrii !rri \fi,rRft 1 impr^ •^, ^ ^./<-fs ; t^'i.^1 lOCill^s ; . i '^<^ </-'Lj li.-r'J ;**-i i ^ L^l LT^ ^"/d^ ^-i J ^-4^/^;. (4) A psrusal of pars-18 ofthe impugned awa'd shows that no ev:dence was ;ed by the appeiiant/claimant to prove hls ;ncome. Despite edmission or the fact that the appe'Iant/clsimant was filing incorne tax returns he did nct fi'e a cooy c'the retum for a"v year befcre the Tribuna!. (5) in this vie'"/ of the matter; loss of yearly income assessed by the Tribuna! at Rs.14.400/- cannot &e said to be unjustifiebie . Thererore, i am of She considered oplnion that fhe compensstion Rs.3,32,774/- awarded by the Tribuna! is commensurste with the inju^' sustained by the clalmant in the ascident. No ground for enhsncement is made out. The appea] being deyrad- of mer!t is sccordingly Qismissed at the stage of admissiorf. SA:' ^^W^ ,aWe',\,^es !ya ^^os>