~T IN T[IE mOH COTJRT OP JUOICATURE AT SILASPUK fC.G.) SinyfeBench M^[o.-S(^-of2Q06 APPELLANT fCLAIMANT) ^ Ratanlal Mahobia, Aged-58 years, S/o.-Late Shri Dukfava RamMahobia, R/o-Dangania basti, Raipur, Tah. & Distt.-Raipur(C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS : 1. Khilawan Soni, Aged - 40 Years, S/o-Ramakant Soni, R/o-Iinlibhata, Mahasamund, Tdi. & Distt.-Mahasamund \^y/ ^'t^' .-••' ^y (ChhattisgaA) .<^ ^.^'••y' ,^y 'y 2. SmtDurga Poddar, W/o-Raghavram Chowdhry, R/o-Wardno.12, Mafaasamund Tah. & Distt. Mahasamund(C.G.) 3. The New India Insurance Co. Ltd. /' Throu^i- Divisional Manager, Divisional office, Bajrang Market, G.E.Road, Raipur(C.G.) (PoUey no. 450301/31/04/86004, date of Limitation- From 5/12/04 To 4/12/05) MEMORANDAM OF APPEAL UNDER SECTIC»ite OF THOB M.V.ACT. 1988. FORENHANCEMENTQFAWARD. XI-HC-78 *11*1CTT ShHlch 3:5T^nqraq', ©Tfl+l'is,Rldlti^ ^.A./.C.\. -.?.c(2-y^T 2006 3TI^?T 4at»»(t{ci(^q<,ET) 3TI^TsRrf?qNi ^tShHltl STaTWHf^crsn^r .342/2d06 13-11-2006 Shri A.S.Iqbal, learned couns^l Heard on I.A.No.3452/2006 Cwisidered and atlowed. Syno| The only ground urged by Miscellaneous Appeal (C) No.; by the learned Motor Accident suffering undergone by the claima^t collor bone wos wholly inadequote. XIVth Additional Motor Accident4 No.46/2006 is perused. The learned Motor Accideht cdmpensation of R& 27.000/-. An month for the laid up period i.e. 4 had himself stated that his monthlyl filed by the claimant to the tune amount of Rs.2,000/- was (n»arded Rs.2.000/- was also awarded towal- during the period of hospitalizati|on cnaarded towcrds healthy diet. M.A.C.T. aworded Rs.5,000/-. Learhed counsel fw the disability was suffered by the 'niltd'fl-f lltldT ff te^t'ilalWK ^srf^R'sn^r auns^l for the appellant. For taking synopsis on record. >bsis is taken on record. l^arned counsel for the appellant in this is that o sum of Rs.8,000/- cuwarded Cl|iims Tribunat, Roipur towards pain and on account of fracture of ribs and ^wsrd dated 29-04-2006 passed by the Cloims Tribimal, Raipur in Clcrim Case Clainns Tribunal hos auifarded total a|iiount of Rs.l6,CXX3/- i.e. Rs.4,000/- per Imonths was aworded since •t+ie cloimant |income Bfas Rs.4.000/- onty. Medical bitls |of Rs.1,794.85 were corsidered and an 1-owwds medical expenses. An amount of •ds requirement of assistant/attendant and a sum of Rs.2,000/- was aiso T^wards pain and suffering the^.leorned app^llant did not dispute that no permcBient claahiant. He also admitted that no medical XI-HC-78 OT^T^iTR-fi* g2IT3TI^Tsb*li'sh NIHCTTSbHrai 3ST'<II<<IM<(, ©TdwiS,Rl<-iwy ^K-A.<y^^200& sn^r <raw (yit^si^) STBTW:flf5(T3n^T 2- evidence or docimentary proof undergone pain and suffering foj adduced before the Claims Tribundl. In view of the fact that show the extent of pain and su1 disability was suffered by the Rs.5.000/- by the learned Motor pain and suffering cannot be fault^d In this view of the matterl ainarded by the learned Motor Acji and reosonable compensort'ion. Consequently, this admission as being devoid of merit.| Certified copy as per rules. «hi<<f<"]<fl-i wiv!i if te^ <|S|WK ^Slf^R'Sfl^T Ito substontiate that the claimant had a period of more than 4 months was tfie claimant did not lead any evidence to Fferin9 ond the fact thttt no permonent lclaimant, the award of an amount of lAccident Claims Tribunal. Raipur towards with. it cannot be said thot the compensation Acjcident Claims Tribunat, Raipur is not just Miscellcateous Appeal is dismissed at the stage of Sd/- Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh Judge P.T.O.