M. A. No. 1834/2010 12-7-10
Shri Rakesh Khare, learned counsel for the appellant.
I.A. No. 4853/2010, which is an application for
condonation of delay.
Before considering the application for condonation of
delay I thought it appropriate to look into the merits of the case.
This is an appeal against the award dated 30.11.2009
passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Lakhnadon in
MCC No.89/2009 whereby the tribunal has awarded a
compensation of Rs.21,500/- to the appellant along with
interest. The appeal has been preferred for enhancement.
The claim was filed on the ground that appellant
sustained permanent disability because of fracture on right
wrist. The appellant has not examined any doctor to prove the
disability or its percentage. No disability has been found. On
that basis the tribunal has held that the permanent disability of
the appellant was not proved. In this connection, the reliance
can be profitably had to the decision rendered by the Apex
Court in Rajesh Kumar vs. Yaduvir and others, (2008) 7 SCC
305 wherein it is held that the disability cannot be held proved
and the disability certificate cannot be admissible in evidence
unless the doctor who has treated the injured and given the
disability certificate is examined before the Court and states as
to on what basis the said opinion with regard to disability is
tendered.
The appellant has filed Ex.P-10 and P-11 as the medical
papers but on scrutiny of the same the tribunal has not found
M.A. No. 1834/2010
2
any correlation between them as the medicine prescribed by the
doctor in Ex.P-11 which was the prescription of the doctor did
not match with the medicine described on the medical bill
Ex.P10 produced by the appellant.
The tribunal has found that the appellant sustained
fracture on her right wrist for which the tribunal has awarded a
sum of Rs.10,000/- as compensation. Since there was fracture
on the hand and the appellant could not have done her labour
job for a month the tribunal has also awarded a sum of
Rs.1,500/- on that count. The tribunal has awarded a total sum
of Rs.21,500/-.
In view of the aforesaid, I do not find that the tribunal has
committed any illegality in allowing the compensation for a sum
of Rs.21,500/-. The compensation so awarded is jut and proper.
No case for enhancement of the award of compensation is
made out.
In the application for condonation of delay it is only
stated that the appellant could not arrange for money for filing
of the appeal in time. No day to day delay has been explained.
The reason for condonation of delay is also not sufficient.
Finding no merits in the appeal and no reason for
condonation of delay, the I.A. No.4853/2010 stands dismissed.
Accordingly, the present appeal also stands dismissed.
(R.K. GUPTA)
Judge
S/