Amitava Lala, J.
1. This appeal is arising out of the judgment and order dated 1.5.2008, passed by the concerned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jhansi, awarding a compensation of Rs. 1,40,000 alongwith interest @ 6% per annum on account of injuries of the claimant.
2. It has been contended before us by the appellant/insurance company that the medical certificate, which has been given by the medical practitioner of the community health centre could not be said to be appropriate medical certificate for the purpose of ascertainment of disability of 45%.
3. It is pertinent to mention that normally we consider the validity of the certificate to be issued by the office of the Chief Medical Officer of the district, if there is signature of more than one medical practitioners by following the principle plurality causes genuinity. Learned Counsel has shown us a circular letter dated 26.8.1986 to that extent. After going through the same, we find that the same is not needed for consideration for these type of cases, but for some other purposes. Moreover, it is purely an Administrative Order. However, by taking notional value of the order now we have to see whether there is any legal force behind it or not, so that the same may be followed strictly. In this context, we have gone to the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, but we do not find any definition of 'medical practitioner'. Again we have gone through the provisions of Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 and found reference is available there. It is pertinent to mention here that such an Act is applicable in the case under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Be that as it may, if there is an application under Section 163A or 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, then at least some clue is available before us to analyse the evidentiary value of the medical certificate.
4. Section 2(i) of Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, provides a definition of 'qualified medical practitioner' as follows:
Qualified medical practitioner' means any person registered under any (Central Act, Provincial Act or an Act of the Legislature of a {State}) providing for the maintenance of a register of medical practitioners, or, in any area where no such last-mentioned Act is in force, any person declared by the State Government, by notification in the official Gazette, to be a qualified medical practitioner for the purposes of this Act.
5. Even on ascertainment of amount of compensation under Section 4 therein, again the word qualified medical practitioner is incorporated without specifying the issue, whether certificate will be issued by the Chief Medical Officer or not. However, it is desirable that in such circumstances of the case, the genuinity of the certificate will be examined. If it is done by the office of the Chief Medical Officer with the counter signatures of other medical practitioner, then it will carry more weight in the eyes of law. In this case, an Orthopaedic Surgeon being member of specialist sitting in the office of the Superintendent Community Health Centre, Mauranipur, Jhansi issued the certificate counter signed by other medical practitioner/s. It is well known that Community Health Centre runs under the control of District Health Office. Therefore, such certificate cannot be said to be of no force. Moreover, poor people of having lower income group may or may not travel up to the district head quarters to avail such certificate due to various contingencies. Therefore, taking into account such aspect of the matter, we cannot hold and say that the medical certificate issued by an Orthopaedic Surgeon alongwith other members of such Community Health Centre, is not genuine. Where a medical certificate is issued by any Government authority it carries status of public document.
6. The other aspect is difference between a certificate given by the single medical practitioner and by a board of medical practitioners. Plural includes singular when singular-excludes plural. In every sphere of life specially in discharging noble cause, plurality is respected. Therefore, although there is no hard-n-fast rule is available to obtain certificate from the office of the Chief Medical Officer or from the office of Subordinate to Chief Medical Officer. But it is desirable to obtain certificate of such nature, having more value and authentic in nature. We have already gone into this aspect of the matter and we find no reason to doubt the validity and/or genuinity of the medical certificate.
7. Learned Counsel appearing for insurance company also contended that there is no proof of earning. But we find that the Court extensively considered this issue before giving the finding and fixed the income much less than Rs. 100, i.e., Rs. 60 which is grossly on the lower side to maintain himself and his family members. Therefore, we also do not find any reason to interfere with the judgment and order of the Tribunal.
8.. The appeal is dismissed even at the stage of admission, however, without imposing any cost.
9. Incidentally, the appellant-insurance company prayed that the statutory deposit of Rs. 25,000 made before this Court for preferring this appeal be remitted back to the concerned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal as expeditiously as possible in order to adjust the same with the amount of compensation to be paid to the claimants, however, such prayer is allowed.
A.P. Sahi, J.
I agree.