^ •s. ""a ADpellant (Claimant) Respondents HIGH COURTOF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M.A. No.53 of 2004 Achal Singh S/o Hardayal Singh, aged about 38 years, Occupafion-Drwer, M.P.S.R.T^. Depo, Raigarh (Chhatfa'sgarh) At presenfly Driver in Mahasamund Jila Panchayat Mahasarhund. Versus 1. Tarkeshwar Natti Singh S/o Si^iram Singh, aged about 30 years, cupation-Driver,j?o magardahi Ganesh Chowk, Samastipur (Bihar) 2. Jaganath Thakur S/o R.L.Thakur, ^ed aboirt 30 years, Occupation-Truck Owner, r/o Punjabi Colony Samastipur. Presenlty residing art D-148, P.C.Colony, Kankad Bagh, Patna (Bihar) 3. Branch Manager, ttie New India lnsuranoe_ C<x(ipany Ltd; Branch cfficer-^tigudi Ghowk, Raigarh (ChhatBgarh). (M1SCELLANEOUS APPEAL U/S 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLE ACT) (SB: Hon'bteMr.T.P.Sharma,J.) MrBasant Dewangan, counsel for the appellant. Mr.Shailendra Sharma, counset for respondent No.3. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 23rd June.2009) The appeltant has flled this appeal against ttie award dated 30.8.2003 passed bythe Forth AddiUonal Motor AccidentClaimsTrJbunalO=.T.C.),Raigarh, in Ctaim Case No.10/02. ^ / 2. The award is chaltenged on ftie ground that the Fortti Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal has awarded inaclequate compensadon on account of motor .accident. 3. Undisputed facts ofthe case are thatfce appellantsustalnedtnjuriesoh ttie motor acddent on 8.5.96 which wasdriven by respendent No.1 and vehtete was &wned tey.respondent No.2 and the same was insured with respondent ^to.3. Cteim peUtion under Section 1^ of the Motor Vehicle Act for compensatton of .i.p^?%? ^- Rs.2,23,000/- was filed. After appreciaUng fte evidence availabte on record, learned Forth Additional Motor Accident Ctaims Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.17,200/- along with 9% interest from the date of filing of tte petitton i.e.2311.96. 4. Leamed counsel for the appejlant submits that the appeBant has examlned the doctor who was specifically proved ttie nahire of injuries. The appeBant sustained fracture of flbula bone and steel rod was inputed which shows the gravity of the injury but the learned Forth Additional Motor Accldent Claims Tribunal has awarded very meager amount of compensation. 5. On the other hand, award impugned te supported on behalf of respondent No.3 and submits ttiat the leamed Fortti Additional Motor Accident Claims Trtbunal has awarded proper compensation. 6. It is evident from the award that the appellant was worklng as a driver in M.P.S.R.T.C. and medical facltity was available to himand medieal expenseswere reimbursable to him. After exctudlng the part of medlcal expenses which were reimbursable, the Court below has assessed the compensation of Rs.17,200/- on account of such accident. 7. On due consideraUon of the facts and cireumstances of fte case, 1 do not flnd any illegality or infirmity in ttie award Impugned. The appeal is liable to be dismissed and It is hereby dismtssed. No order as to cost. Sd/- T. P. Sbarma Judge