Nanda Bhaurao Ahire vs Hiraman Bandu Wagh And Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 11069 Bom

                                             1
                                                                       1451.04FA

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                          BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                               FIRST APPEAL NO. 1451 OF 2004

          Nanda Bhaurao Ahire
          Age : 32 years, Occ : Nil,
          R/o Dattamandir Chouk,
          Fagane, Tq. Dhule, Dist. Dhule.
          .                                             ..APPELLANT
                                                     (Original Claimant)
                   VERSUS

          1.       Hiraman Bandu Wagh
                   Age : 29 years, Occ : Jeepowner
                   & Political Worker,
                   R/o Near Wadibhokar Naka,
                   Deopur, Dhule,
                   Tq. & Dist. Dhule.

          2.   The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.,
               Kalyan Bhavan, Lane No.2,
               Dhule, Dist. Dhule.
                     .                             ..RESPONDENTS
                                             ( Original respondents)
                                  ...
          Advocate for Appellant : Mr.M.H. Patil
          Advocate for Respondent No.1: Mr. Amol S. Sawant
          Advocate for Respondent No.2: Mr.R.F. Totala
                                      ...
                                  CORAM : S.G.DIGE, J.

                                        RESERVED ON : 28.09.2022
                                        PRONOUNCED ON : 19.10.2022

          JUDGMENT :

Being aggrieved with the judgment and award

1451.04FA

passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dhule (for

short, "the Tribunal"), the appellant - original claimant

preferred this appeal seeking enhancement.

2. It is contention of the learned counsel for the

appellant that the appellant has suffered 40% permanent

disability in the occurred accident. There is certificate issued

by the Civil Surgeon, Nandurbar at Exhibit-22 showing 40%

disability but it was not considered by the Tribunal and has

awarded paltry amount of Rs.45,000/- as compensation.

Hence requested to allow the appeal.

3. It is the contention of the learned counsel for

respondent no.2 that after the accident when

appellant/claimant was treated at Chhatrapati Shivaji

Maharaj Hospital, Kalwa, doctor has referred the injury as

injury to right UL. There was no fracture injury but

thereafter 40% disability certificate is issued on the basis of

the treatment given at Kalwa. The disability certificate

which is at Exhibit - 22 is false and bogus. No medical

1451.04FA

expenses produced on record to show that she has

undergone any operation or had taken any treatment for

40% disability. The order passed by the Tribunal is legal

and valid.

4. I have heard all the learned counsel. Perused

the judgment and order passed by the Tribunal.

5. The appellant is seeking enhancement on the

ground that when she has suffered 40% disability, the

inadequate compensation is awarded. On 9 th January, 2000,

the appellant was traveling by Jeep of respondent no.1 from

Dhule to Washi on Kasara Bypass road on Mumbai-Agra

Highway on that road accident was occurred to vehicle of

claimant. She was treated at Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj

Hospital, Kalwa and then at Dhule. Exhibit-21 is MLC

certificate issued by the Medical Officer, Kalwa. In this

certificate in the nature of injury column, it is mentioned

that the injury to right UL. It is dated 9 th January, 2000.

Exhibit-23 is certificate issued by Dr. K.A. Saindane, Dhule.

1451.04FA

In this certificate, it is mentioned that the appellant is

suffering from contusion to right elbow and she needs rest

for the period 18.01.2000 to 18.02.2000. The disability

certificate is at Exhibit-22 issued by the Civil Surgeon, Civil

Hospital, Nandurbar. The said disability certificate is issued

on the basis of the M.L.C. certificate given at Kalwa Hospital

and X-ray. In this document, it is mentioned that slight

angulation of right UL, pain during movement, cannot

perform heavy work. It is dated 1st November, 2000.

6. It is significant to note that the appellant was

not admitted in the hospital though it is said that she has

suffered 40% disability. No medical expenses produced on

record to show that she was taking any pills or medicines

for the disability she has suffered. No doctor is examined to

prove her 40% disability. Exhibit-22 - disability certificate is

issued on the basis of Exhibit-21, but from Exhibit-21, it

does not reveal that there was permanent disability. It

appears that the disability certificate is issued without any

proper verification. Hence, I do not find any infirmity in the

1451.04FA

order of the Tribunal.

7. In view of the above, I pass the following

order:-

ORDER

(i) The appeal is dismissed.

          (ii)     No order as to costs.

                                                          [S.G.DIGE]
                                                            JUDGE
          SGA/-