•:V^.^Jt HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRI SUNIL KUiVIAR SINHA, J. /^b Miscellaneous Appeal (Cl No. 959 of 2008 Govind Ram Tandan, S/o.Chainuram Satnami, aged about 43 years, R/o. Viliage Risda, P.S. Masturi, Tahsil Masturi, District Bilaspur (C.G.) Versys Shyam Sunder, S/o. Chaitram Satnami, aged about 28 years, R/o. Village Birati Khaira, District Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) Govindram, s/o. N.K. Agrawal, R/o. Mungeli Road IVIarigla, Tahsit and District Bilaspur (C.G.) Branch Manager, The New India Insurance Company Limited, Divisional Office Raipur, Through Branch office, Bilaspur, Opposite Rajeev Piaza, Biiaspur (C.G.) MisceSianeousADDealynderSetrtionJ73^gftheMotOTVehicles Present: Shri Goutam Khetrapai, learned counsel forthe appetlant. ORDER ith (29!nJuly,2008) The foliowing order of the Court was passed by Gupta, CJ. l.;~t- ^ Shri Goutam Khetrapal, learned counsel for the appellant is heard on I.A. No. 01/2008, an application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. 2. On due consideration, I.A.No.01/2008 is allowed and the delay in filing the appea! is hereby condoned. 3. Shri Goutam Khetrapal, learned counsel for the appellant is heard on admission. 4. Appellant - Govind Ram Tandan is seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Eighth Additionai Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (F.T.C.), Bilaspur (for short "the Tribunal") vide award dated 12-09-2007, passed in Claim Case No.15/2007. 5. As against the compensation of Rs.6,75,000/- claimed by the ciaimant for the injury sustained by him in the motor accident on 30 June 2006, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.10,000/- along with the interest @ 9% per annum, from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6. Shri Goutam Khetrapal, le'arned counsel for the appeilant vehemently argued that the compensation of Rs.10,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is too low in comparison to the serious nature of the injuries sustained by the appellant in the motor accident. 7. For the reasons best known to the ctaimant/no doctor was examined before the Tribunal to establish the fracture of finaer said to have been sustained by the claimant in the motor accident. 8. The Tribunal inspite of the above, has been quite liberal in awarding a sum of Rs.10,000/- as compensation to the claimant. BSSBB^B(8BBR8BBBSBBIISSill^BB!iBISSI i!liS3iSSSSsSsisyWf!SK9SWW'WSS:vWXi!98SS •3; 9. As the appellant miserably failed in establishing the fracture said to have been sustained by him in the motor accident, we do not find any scope for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 10. The appeal, therefore, is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed summarily. Sd/- Chief Jusdce SA'- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge \: