?a HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH: BILASPUR Single Bench: ^^ Aopellant Claimant Respondents Hon'ble Shri Ditip Raosaheb Deshmukh, Jl. M.A.C.No.1380of2007 S. Kamal Lochan S/o Late Shri S. Jagnnath, aged about 35 years, R/o Quarter No.1/B, Road No.34, Sector- 1 ,Bhilai, Tahsil and District Durg (CG) PresentSy residsng at New Telgu Nagar, Labour Colony, Zone-3, Khursipar, P.S. Chhawani Bhilai, Tahsil and District Durg (CG) Versus 1. Lekhu Ram S/o Gend Lal Sahu, aged about 32 years, R/o Basantpur, P.S. Basantpur. Tahsil and District Rajnandgaon (CG) 2. Sanjay Bahadur Singh, S/o Prem Bahadur Singh, village Sirigh Travels, Bhawani Nagar, Tahsil and District Rajnandgoan (CG) 3. New india Insurance Company Limited, Kankaria Building Kamthi Line, Rajnandgaon, Tahsil and District Rajnandgaon (CG) Misc. Appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act 1988 Present: Shri V.K. Tekam, counsel for the appellant. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 08.04.2008) Heard on admission. (2) The appeitant is aggrieved by the award dated 29.08.2007 passed Jn claims case No.22/2006 by the XIth Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (FTC) (henceforth the MACT) Durg, whereby in an injury case, compensation of Rs.45,900/- was awarded. (3) The MACT has awarded compensation as under:- A/ Expenses incurred in treatment Rs.13,900/- 2-- .-^- Priya B/ Towards permanent disabijity = Rs.20,000/- C/ Towards special complete diet = Rs.12.000/- T o ta 1 = Rs.45,900/- (4) The claimant has stated that he was hospitalized in Government Hospital only for a day and was discharged thereafter. Although he has stated that he was admitted thereafter for one month in the Steel City, Medical Centre, Adarsh Nagar, yet no discharge ticket or any other document was filed to substantiate this fact. The claimant has stated that he did not report for duty from the date of accident i.e. 19.01.2005 to 8.10.2005. No reason has been assigned by the ciaimant for this. Dr. A.K. Yadav AW-2 who issued the disability certificate on 27.1.2006 i.e. more than a year after the accident admittedthat he has given the disability certificate mereiy on perusal of the papers of treatment. Besides, the claimant was working as a Peon in the office of Anil Kumar Daga AW-3. The claimant has not been abie to prove loss of earning due to the accident for a long duration. (5) In the facts and circumstances mentioned above, 1 am of he considered opinion, that the compensation awarded by the MACT is just and reasonable compensation and does not call fpr any interference. (6) The appeal has no merit, which is accordingly dismissed at the stage of admission. Sd/- Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh Judge