-1- NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 2273 of 2019 1 - Smt. Uma Patel W/o Shri T.P. Patel Aged About 59 Years R/o Hig- 1, Parijat Castle, Ring Road No. 2, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh...............Claimant, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus 1 - Balaji Rao S/o Bajirao, Aged About 42 Years R/o Village Chichirda, P.S. Chakarbhata, Tehsil Bilha, District Bilapur Chhattisgarh (Driver), District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Shri Sahoran Lal Sahu, S/o Bodhiram Sahu, Aged About 56 Years R/o Chhatona, P.S. Chakarbhata, Tehsil Bilha, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh...............(Owner), District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 3 - National Insurance Company Limited Through General Manager, Vyapar Vihar Road, Bilaspur, Tehsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.........(Insurance Company), District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh .. Respondents For Appellant/Claimant/injured : Ms. Deepali Pandey, Advocate For respondents No.1 & 2 : Mr. Tissy Abrahim, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. K. Rohan, Advocate For Respondents No.3 : Mr. Ashish Gupta, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 28.10.2025 1) Heard. 2) The appellant/claimant has filed this appeal for enhancement of compensation against an award passed by the learned Second Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur (C.G.) in Claim Case No.154/2017 dated 13.02.2019 whereby, the learned Tribunal has passed an award to the tune of REKHA SINGH -2- Rs.1,19,833/- with interest @ 6% per annum on account of injuries sustained by the claimant. 3) The brief facts are that on 28.06.2015, the claimant was going home situated at Ramavalley, Bilaspur on her car, at the same time, driver of the offending tractor bearing registration No.C.G.10/DA/1339 by driving it rashly and negligently dashed the car, resultantly, the claimant sustained grievous injury over left eye. The claimant was treated at Apollo Hospitals, Bilaspur. A criminal case was registered against the driver of the offending vehicle. The claimant further pleaded that at the time of accident, her age was 55 years and she was earning Rs.35,000/- to Rs.50,000/- per month by practicing advocacy. The driver and owner of the offending vehicle filed reply and denied the averments made in the claim application. The Insurance company also filed reply. The learned Tribunal framed issues, the parties led evidence and thereafter award was passed. 4) Learned counsel appearing for the appellant/claimant would submit that the learned Tribunal has not honoured the medical expenses incurred in the treatment and plastic surgery. She would further submit that the learned Tribunal has not granted compensation for damage caused to the car and bill submitted by the claimant in this regard to the tune of Rs.73,250/- has been discarded. She would contend that the learned Tribunal has not granted proper compensation on conventional heads. She would pray to enhance the compensation. 5) On the other hand, learned counsels appearing for the respondents would oppose the submissions made by Ms. Pandey. They would submit that the -3- learned Tribunal has awarded just and proper compensation. It is argued that the claimant failed to examine the treating doctor to prove the seriousness of the injury sustained by the claimant. It is also contended that though xerox copy of the bill generated from Satya Auto Mobiles to the tune of Rs.73,250/- was produced but no one has been examined to prove its contents and therefore, the learned Tribunal has rightly discarded it. They would contend that the appeal deserves to be dismissed. 6) I have heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 7) A perusal of the record would show that the claimant filed a claim case on account of injury sustained by her over left eye. A perusal of the medical prescriptions Ex.P/3 & Ex.P/4 would reveal that there was a cut injury over left eye. In radiology test, no bonny injury was detected. CT Brain was also conducted at Apollo Hospitals and no significant brain parenchymal abnormality was found vide Ex.P/9. It is not in dispute that the claimant has not examined the treating doctor. The claimant presented medical bills Ex.P/10 to Ex.P/65. A perusal of the record would show that the claimant has exhibited same medical bills twice and thrice. 8) Learned Tribunal has considered the genuine medical bills and same is evident from a chart prepared by the learned Tribunal. Learned Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.33,833/- against the medical bills submitted by the claimant. 9) With regard to damage caused to the car owned by the claimant, the claimant had produced xerox copy of bill generated at Satya Auto Mobiles to the tune of Rs.73,250/-. The claimant has admitted the fact that her car was insured with -4- the Insurance Company and 50% of the repair cost was paid by the Insurance Company. 10) The claimant could not prove the fact that Rs.73,250/- was an amount paid by the claimant herself to Satya Auto Mobiles. The claimant further failed to examine any authorized person of Satya Auto Mobiles to prove the validity and genuineness of xerox copy of bill. Therefore, in my opinion, learned Tribunal rightly discarded it. 11) Learned Tribunal further awarded Rs.46,000/- for loss of earning; Rs.20,000/- for pain and suffering; Rs.10,000/- for special diet and Rs.10,000/- for conveyance. As there was no permanent disability and no evidence has been led in this regard, in my opinion, learned Tribunal has passed just and proper compensation. I do not find any good ground to interfere with the award passed by the learned Tribunal. Accordingly, this appeal fails and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Rekha