PI?" e itGHCOURT OFCHHAmSGARHAT BU-ASPUR Sinale Bench : Hon'ble Shri Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh, J, Appeljant Cjaimant Resnondents Piaintiffe I.A.(C.)No.1048of2007 Premnath S/o Roop Singh, Aged about 22 years, R/o Vjllage Madanar, Post Khamni, P.S. Kondagaon, District Bastar (C.G.5 Versus 1. Arvind Patel, S/o Premji Bhai Patel, 44 years, C/o Bastar Travels, Narayanpur, DistrictBastar(C.G.) 2. «Vs Bastar Traveis, Narayanpur, District Bastar (C.G.) 3. The New Indja Insurance Company Limited through Branch Manager, near Jhankar Cinema, 'Jagdalpur, District Bastar (C.G.) IViisceUaneousABBeal under Section 173 of the MotopVehicles Act. Presenj : - Shri Prafull Bharat, oounsei for the appetlant. ORALORDER (Passed on this 16 day of December, Heard on admission. (2) This is a claimant's appeal for enhancement of eompensation of Rs.2,000/- awarded by the Additiona! Motor Aocidents Claims Tribunal, {F.T.C.}, Kondagaon (henceforth "the Tribunal") vlde order dated 30-07-2007 passed in Claim Case No.04/2007. (2) The sole ground urged by learfted counsel for the appellant in this appeai is that the Tribunal did not consider the documents fited by the claimant for substantiating that he had sustained. grievous injury in the aocident while awarding meager compensation of Rs2,000/-. (3) Record of the Claim CaseNo.04/2007 is perused. The M.L.C. report of the claimant dated 04-04-2004 does not reveal that the claimant had sustained any grievous injury due to the accia'ent. It only shows that the ctaimant had_ 1?l-j;..: 'i/ lfflit!n!l';ih;"i:i: GP •L sustained an abrasion and a .superficial lacerated wound on the left side ofthe face. The documents i.e. X-Ray report Ex.P-7 and Ex.P-5 fited bythe claimantto substantiate that he had sustained grievous injury due to the aocident are dated 30-06-2005 whereas the acoident had oocurred on 04-04-2004. In this wew of the matter, there is no material on reoord to show any nexus between the injuries found on the ctaimant by Dr. L. L. Thakur, A.W.2 on 30-06-2005 and the aocident which had oocurred on 04-04-2004. (4) There is no merit in this appeal which is aocordingly dismissed at fhe stageofadmission. ,' Sd/- DUip Raosaheb Deshmukh Judge "tumane