JUDGMENT : - Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice (Oral) Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment and award dated 27.12.2012, made by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur in MAC No. 14 of 2009, titled Sarwan Singh versus Shri Dharam Chand and others, whereby compensation to the tune of Rs.4,05,000/-, came to be awarded in favour of the claimant, hereinafter referred to as “the impugned award”, for short, on the grounds taken in the memo of appeal. 2. The claimant has questioned the impugned award only on the ground of adequacy of compensation. 3. The insurer/owner-insured and driver have not questioned the impugned award on any ground thus, the impugned award, except so far as it relates to adequacy of compensation, attained finality against them. 4. Briefly stated, the claimant had filed claim petition before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal below, being victim of a vehicular accident, which was allegedly caused by the driver, namely, Neeraj while driving Jeep bearing registration No.HP-28-8588 in rash and negligent manner. The claimant sustained injuries, which has rendered him physically disabled. He has suffered 40% permanent disability. 5. The Tribunal, after examining the evidence on record came to the conclusion that the claimant is entitled to compensation under the heads “medical expenditure” Rs.1,34,000/-, “transportation charges” Rs.10,000/, “attendant charges” Rs.5,000/-, “future loss of earnings” Rs.2,16,000/- and “pain and sufferings” Rs.40,000/- The total sum of Rs.4,05,000/-. 6. The learned counsel for the claimant argued that the permanent disability has affected 100% earning capacity of the claimant thus, the Tribunal has fallen in error in not taking the disability of the claimant in consideration. He was asked to show whether there is any expert evidence to the effect that 40% permanent disability suffered by the claimant has affected his earning capacity in toto, he has failed to do so. However, I have gone through the impugned award and disability certificate. There is nothing on the file which can be made basis for holding that the permanent disability of the claimant has affected 100% earning capacity of the claimant. There is not even any whisper made by the doctor/ expert while he was examined by the claimant and cross-examined by the other respondents before the Tribunal below. 7. The claimant had prayed for compensation to the tune of Rs.10,00,000/- as per the break-ups given in the claim petition. 8. There is not even any whisper made by the doctor/ expert while he was examined by the claimant and cross-examined by the other respondents before the Tribunal below. 7. The claimant had prayed for compensation to the tune of Rs.10,00,000/- as per the break-ups given in the claim petition. 8. The Tribunal, after making a guess work came to the assessment that the claimant is entitled to the compensation discussed hereinabove, which, according to me is just and appropriate compensation and cannot be said to be inadequate, rather it can be safely said to be adequate compensation. 9. Having said so, the appeal is dismissed alognwith pending applications, if any, and the impugned award is upheld. 10. Send down the record forthwith.