1 2025:CGHC:51545 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 786 of 2019  Shyama Bai W/o Bhuwan Sahu Aged About 50 Years R/o Village - Lohiya Nagar Pade Para, Ward No. 17, Balodabazar, Police Station - Balodabazar, District Balodabazar - Bhatapara Chhattisgarh., District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant(s) versus 1. Sunil Prajapati S/o Premchand Prajapati Aged About 22 Years R/o Shree Cement Factory Colony, Police Station - Suhela, District (Revenue And Civil) - Balodabazar Chhattisgarh. ---(Driver Of Hero Motor Cycle Delux C.G. 22 Ac - 0311), District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh 2. Pen Singh Mahilange S/o Sudarshan Mahilange Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Achholi, Tahsil And Police Station - Palari, District (Revenue And Civil) - Balodabazar Chhattisgarh. ---(Owner Of Hero Motor Cycle Delux C.G. 22 Ac - 0311), District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh 3. Branch Manager I.C.I.C.I. Lombard General Insurance Company Limited, Devendra Nagar, Wanijya Bhawan, Raipur, District (Revenue And Civil) - Raipur Chhattisgarh. ---(Insurer Of Hero Motor Cycle Delux C.G. 22 Ac - 0311), District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Appellant/Injured : Mr. Anand Kesharwani, Advocate For Respondent No. 2 : Ms. Prachi Singh, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. Shikhar Sharma, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 16.10 .2025 1. Heard on admission. 2. This appeal has been preferred against award passed by the learned 2nd Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Balodabazar in Claim Case No. 115/2016 dated 24.01.2019, whereby the learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 73,215/- to the appellant/claimant/injured on account of injuries SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Digitally signed by SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Date: 2025.10.17 18:18:45 +0530 2 sustained by her. 3. The facts of the present case are that on 22.05.2016 when the claimant was returning home along with her husband Bhuwan Sahu on bicycle, the driver of the offending motorcycle bearing registration No. CG 22 AC 0311 by driving it rashly and negligently dashed the bicycle from backside, consequently, she fell down and sustained injuries over head, back and wrist. 4. The respondent No. 1 driver was proceeded ex-parte. The respondent No. 2/owner of the vehicle filed reply and stated that on the date of accident, the motorcycle was used by respondent No. 1/driver without his knowledge and permission. The Insurance company filed reply and denied contents of application and took plea of breach of conditions of Insurance policy. The learned Tribunal framed issues and passed award. 5. Mr. Anand Kesharwani, Advocate would submit that the learned Tribunal has granted compensation at lower side. He would further submit that disability certificate has not been taken into consideration by the learned Tribunal and on other conventional heads, meager amount has been awarded. He would pray to enhance the compensation. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 2 would oppose. Ms. Prachi Singh, Advocate would submit that the learned Tribunal has granted just and proper compensation. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 8. The claimant sustained injures and remained hospitalized at Balodabazar for 3 days and in Ram Krishna Care Hospital for 7 days. She submitted medical bills of Rs. 28,215/-. With regard to disability certificate though it is pleaded in the claim application, but certificate was not produced before the learned Tribunal; therefore, the learned Tribunal rightly recorded a 3 finding that there was no permanent disability. 9. Further, the claimant has not examined the treating Doctor to prove the seriousness of injuries sustained by her, even, she failed to produce discharge certificate. 10. The learned Tribunal has honoured the medical bill of Rs. 28,215/-. The learned Tribunal further awarded Rs. 16,000/- for conveyance, Rs. 18,000/- for loss of earning, Rs. 6,000/- for attendant and Rs. 5,000/- for special diet, and thus, awarded a sum of Rs. 73,215/-. I do not find any scope for interference. Accordingly, the instant appeal is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge $iddhant