1 2025:CGHC:38138 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 955 of 2022 The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. (Wrongly Mentioned As Insurance), Through Branch Manager, R/o 1st Floor, Dubey Complex, G.E. Road, Near Basant Talkies, Camp-2, Bhilai, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh. (Insurance Company) … Appellant versus 1 - Tumman Lal Baya S/o Girdhari Lal Baya, Aged About 28 Years R/o Ward No. 13, School Para, Village Naardhi, Police Station Bhiali -3, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh. Presently Residing At Ward On. 55, Tikarapara, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgrh. (Claimant) 2 - Ujjawal Mishra S/o Deepak Mishra, Aged About 33 Years R/o (1) Sundar Nagar, Danganiya Mode, Sundar Nagar, Chowk, Raipur, Police Station D.D. Nagar, Tahsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh, R/o (2) Qr. No. 11/2, P And T Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh. (Owner And Driver Of Vehicle). ... Respondents HARNEET KAUR Digitally signed by HARNEET KAUR Date: 2025.08.04 11:14:17 +0530 2 For Appellant : Mr. Qamrul Aziz, Advocate For Respondents : None though served SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment On Board 01.08 .2025 1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “Act of 1988”) has been preferred by the appellant (Insurance Company) challenging the impugned award dated 28/05/2022 passed by Learned Sixth Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Durg in Claim Case No. 95/2020, whereby compensation to the tune of Rs. 3,17,524/- has been awarded in favour of respondent No. 1 herein (claimant) and the liability of payment of the said compensation has been fastened upon the appellant (Insurance Company). 2. Facts of the case, in brief, is that respondent No. 1/claimant was returning to his house on his motorcycle, however, he was hit by the offending motorcycle bearing Registration No. CG 07 AG 3962 which was being driven by respondent No. 2 herein in a rash and negligent manner due to which, he suffered serious injuries on his head and was admitted in Om Hospital, Raipura wherein he 3 remained in ICU for 10 days and thereafter, was hospitalized for 30 days. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the permanent disability certificate (Ex. P/8) has not been proved by respondent No. 1/claimant, as such, learned Claims Tribunal has erred in granting the aforesaid compensation which is on the higher side. 4. None appeared on behalf of the respondents, though served. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their submissions and perused the record. 6. Learned Claims Tribunal, after appreciation of oral and documentary evidence on record, has clearly recorded a finding that the permanent disability certificate (Ex. P/8) has been duly proved by Dr. Akhilesh Yadav (PW-2), who has clearly stated in his statement before the Court that respondent No. 1/claimant has suffered 14% permanent disability and he has stiffness in hip muscles and ankle joint. Further considering that respondent No. 1/claimant suffered serious injuries and was taken to the Hospital wherein he was admitted in ICU for 10 days and thereafter, remained hospitalized for 30 days, I am of the considered opinion that learned Claims Tribunal has rightly granted the amount of Rs. 3,17,524/- as compensation in favour of 4 respondent No. 1/claimant which does not warrant any interference from this Court. I do not find any merit in this appeal. 7. Accordingly, the instant appeal is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. No cost(s). Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Harneet