1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL NO. 730 OF 2009 Laxman Vinayak Patil, R/o. Shirsale, Tq. & Dist. Dhule. ....Appellant. Versus 1. Vasant Chandan Bharti R/o. Chalisgaon Road, Dhule, Tal. & Dist. Dhule. 2. National Insurance Co. Ltd. ....Respondents. Shri. S.P. Brahme, Advocate for the appellant. Shri. V.N. Upadhye, Advocate for the respondent No. 2. CORAM : R.K. DESHPANDE, JJ. DATE : 11th September, 2009 ORAL JUDGMENT : 1. This appeal is preferred by the original claimant, challenging the judgment and award dated 7.5.2007, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dhule in MACP No. 668/2004 to the extent it rejects the claim of the appellant for an amount of Rs. 1,50,000/-. Thus, by this appeal, the appellant claims enhancement of compensation. 2 2. There was delay in filing the instant appeal and the notice was issued on the application for condonation of delay, in response to which Shri. V.N. Upadhye, the learned counsel has appeared for respondent No. 2 Insurance Company. The matter was, thereafter, heard for admission of the appeal on 24.2.2009 and it seems that the parties have agreed to argue the matter at the stage of admission and accordingly, record and proceedings were called by this Court. The matter is, thus, listed today for final disposal. 2. Heard the leaned counsel for the respective parties. Admit. 3. The main challenge of the appellant is to the finding recorded by the Tribunal in para No. 8 of the judgment, wherein the claim of the appellant for grant of compensation of Rs. 1,50,000/-, has been rejected and only the compensation of Rs.5,000/- has been granted. The Tribunal has held that Dr. Suryewanshi, who was examined as P.W. 2, has stated that he has issued disability certificate to the claimant on 22.2.2005 and has conceded during cross examination that nature of injuries was simple. He has further stated that the injuries shown in the disability certificate were also simple. The Tribunal has, therefore, recorded a finding that when the nature of injuries is simple, it is not known on what basis Dr. Suryewanshi, without referring any book, had shown 60% disablement to the petitioner. The Tribunal has arrived at a conclusion that the disablement shown in certificate is on high level and that too for 3 having caused simple injuries. On the basis of these findings, compensation of Rs.5,000/- has been awarded. 4. I have gone through the record and proceedings and with the assistance of the learned counsel for the appellant, I have also gone through the evidence of the claimant and the doctor. It is apparent that there is no material produced on record to show the permanent disability as is alleged or even in respect of the loss of future earning capacity of the claimant. The learned counsel urged that the claimant has produced the bills for expenses, which he incurred for treatment and the same are not considered by the Tribunal. After going through the evidence of claimant, it is apparent that the bills produced on record have not been proved. A simple statement in the claim petition that claimant has incurred expenses of Rs.30,000/- to Rs.40,000/-, is of no avail, if it is not supported by any evidence on record. In view of this, the question of grant of medical expenses does not at all arise. 5. In view of the above, I do not find any substance in the instant appeal and the same is therefore, dismissed without being any order as to costs. [ R.K. DESHPANDE, J. ] ssc/fa730.09