f "^ ^ <^>^. HIGHC^URTOFJUDICA^ DiyiSIONBjNCH CORAM: HON'BLESHRIS.R.NAYAK.CJ & HON'BI-ESHRID.R.DESHMUKH.J. IWsc.AppealNOd3^0F2005 APPjU.ANT CLAIMANT SohanLalNirmalkar.S^HJrauram Aged about 24 yrs., R/o Village—Teela, P.S.-Gobaranawapara.Distt.-RaipuF VERSUS RESPONDENTS IStoN^PjPUCANTS JubaJdaBegum,agedabout35yrs. Wd/6 Salim Khan. R/o Belsonda, Near Station,P.S.Distt-Mahasamund(C.G.) The National Insurance Co. Ltd.; Division Office, Mobin Mahal, G.E.Road. Raipur (C.G.) Present: Mr. S.C.Verma, leamed couhselforthe appellant. ORALORDER {Passed on 17th January 2006) The following oral order of the Courtwas passed by D.R.DESHMUKH.J.: This is a personal injury case. The accident occurred on 15-11- -•-•:ly^.^.,;.-., •:;\.' •1 ••.;•;••..:;• •••.. .'.:;'•:;,•',.j 2002. It was alleged in the claim application that the applicant had sufferedpermanent disability of fifly perGent. It was strenuously contended | by learned counsel appearing for the appellant that the leamedMAGThasignoredtheclisabilitycertjficateissuedbytheDJstrict Medjcal Board, Raipur. Learhed counsel also contended that the l^arned MACT has not taken into consideration the various documents relating to medicine purchased by the appellant. However, on a careful •^•^ perusaloftherecord oftheTribunal,wefindthatthedisabil<tycertjfiGate ^S^M^ 'l's^r':^?^:: — "2.- ^ G ^ wasJssuedbytheDistrictMedi<^IBoard,Ra(purQn 16-01-2004, wheFeastheaccidenteiccurredon 15-11-2002. Thelearned MACThas, in para 13 of the award, clearly mentioned that in the abserice of any medical evidenCe, it could not be ascertained whether the injuries merrtioned ihthedisabilitycertificiEterelatedtotheacG learned MACT also found that in the absehce of examjnation^^ W Doctor treating the claimant and taking the x-rays dt 17-11 -2QQ3 Ex P/4 and Ex. P/5 and also In the absence of any jegal proof of bills of medicinepurchased,theprayeroftheappellant-|claimantcouldnotbe considered and awarded compensatjon of Rs.30,000/-. (2) Time and again, ^ have reiterated that in a personal injury case, it is incumbent pn the Glaimant to examine tho^ medical pracrtjtjqner trea^ing hjm and also to fead TO^ evidencejto prove the experises incurred in degreeofpermanentdjsabjlitysufferedbytheclaimaht.lntheabsence of any such proof, in our considered opinion, the leamed MACT is wholly justjfjed in rejecting the contentjpn of the claimant and awarding cpmpensation 6f Rs.30,000/-. The appeal Js devoid of merit and it is accordinglydismJssed.Nocosts. Sd/- ChiefJustice Sd/- Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh Judge |^,S.-ffs»S8u..--^—..-^--.-^^--te^ lt%iJf^;r:??S-^S?T^^^^^i?^^%^?^^