ORDER

This Miscellenous Appeal is pending since 2008. Nobody had appeared for the appellant/claimant on 4.9.2017 also. This Court could have dismissed the Miscellaneous Appeal for want of prosecution but taking this fact into consideration the the provisions contained in the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 are benevolent in nature, this Miscellaneous Appeal is being decided on merits with the assistance of Shri Aditya Narayan Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent No.3/Insurance Company,.

Appellant/claimant has filed this Miscellenous Appeal being aggrieved of award dated 20.8.2008 passed by learned II Additional Member Motor Accident Claims Tribunal to the Court of I Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhopal in Claim Case No.1561/2007 on the ground that the Claims Tribunal has awarded meager amount under the head of treatment and has overlooked the several vouchers. The Claims Tribunal has also overlooked the fact that there is shortening of two and a half inch leg affecting the earning capacity of the appellant/claimant but only a sum of Rs.70,00/- has been awarded under the head of mental shock, agony and permanent disablement.

After hearing learned counsel for the respondent No.3/Insurance Company and going through the record of the Claims Tribunal, it is evident that the appellant/claimant is in permanent employment. He has not produced any evidence as to whether his employment prospect has been diminished on account of the accident, which caused the fracture in the ankle of right leg and compound fracture in the femur bone.

The Supreme Court in New India Assurance Company Limited versus Satish Chandra Sharma & Another 2022 ACJ 1211 has held that if an Injured Government Employee has suffered 75% permanent disability to the lower limbs and the Claims Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.6,21,000/-, which was enhanced by the High Court to Rs.56,44,378/- then the High Court was in error in adopting the multiplier method as the Injured Government Employee continued in service after the accident and the permanent disability is with regard to the lower limbs and not the whole body. The Apex Court allowed a further sum of Rs.3,79,000/- taking into consideration the post retiral prospect and set aside the order of the High Court.

Keeping in view the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in New India Assurance Company Limited versus Satish Chandra Sharma (supra), when the facts of the present case are examined then I do not find any infirmity in the impugned award dated 20.8.2008 passed by learned II Additional Member Motor Accident Claims Tribunal to the Court of I Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhopal in Claim Case No.1561/2007 calling for any interference.

Accordingly, this Miscellaneous Appeal fails and is dismissed.

Let record of the Claims Tribunal be sent back.

(VIVEK AGARWAL)

JUDGE amit