F IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURTOF CHHATTISGARH AT BIIASPUR MISC. APPEAL(C) N0.9^6 OF ,ZO&8~-2^~^ MISCELLANEOUS APPEAI. UNDER SECTION 173, MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 Appellant Claimants 1. ,. Dilraj Singh, S/o Jangiram Caste - Gond, aged about 45 years 2.' Smt. Phuleshwari Singh, W/o < Sri Dilraj Singh, Caste- Gond, aged about 40 years. Smt. Santoshi Singh, W/o Nan, Caste s'i-v >'<t>st' 3.. Smt. Santoshi Si .....,^-p^y -La^rsingh~@ -s;f' '.iViwt •"yU-fl^" »*•" " ..^:-< Respondents Non-applicants ^ 1. ^ 2. (All R/o Village Gorta, P.S. Lakhanpur, Tehsil' 7\mbikapur, Distt. Surguja (C.G.) Versus ;Surja Ram S/o Shri Bhikhamram (Owner & Driver), aged about 45 years, R/o Village Bandha, P.S. Lakhanpur, Tehsil - Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja (C.G.) Branch Manager, New India Insurance Co. Ltd., Branch office - Raigarh, Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) 3. ./•' Gendram, S/o Not known, R/o Village - Bandha, P.S. Lakhanpur, Tehsil Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja (C.G.) CLAIM IN APPEAI. FOR SETTING ASIDE AND/OR MODIFICATION OF AWAED,VM.UED AT RS. 15,24,OOO/- FI3SED COURT AFFI3ffiD RS. 15/- (Arising out of the award dated 10/01/2008 in Claim Case No. 59/06 passedby IIIrd Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, AmbikapurfSurguja (C.G.) The 'appellants, .named above, most respectfully beg to submit as under; c i ^S^t u^^?\?'^'7'^^- b' 1~'f HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR CORAM: Hon'bleShri I.M. Quddusi, J. & Hon'ble Shri PrashantKumarMishra.J, I.A(C)No. 284 of 2009 APPELLANTS Dilraj Singh and others. Versus RESPONDENTS Surja Ram and others. Appearance: Miss Sharmila Singhai and Shri Sanjay Agrawal, counset for the appellants. Shri Deepak Gupta, counsel for the respondent No.2. ORAL OROER (28/Q2Q011) Following oral order of the Court was passed by M.Quddusi.J. (1) This appeal has been filed by the claimants against ttie award dated 10/01/2008 passed by III Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. Ambikapur. Surguja (C.G.) in Ctaim Case No. 59/2006. (2) It has come in the evidence that fte deceased was engaged as a labourer on the tractor No. C.G.15A)719 and met with accident as a labourer. The claim petition was dismissed by the claims Tribunal on the ground that he had not died due to accident with the tractor rather he died due to accident occurred on digging of the earth as a result ofcollapse of soil ofthe mine. (3) At the very outset, learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the claimants due to wrong advise has filed the claim petition before fte M.A.C.T. instead of approaching the Commissioner under the Workmen Compensation. Act and they v^- i^ •<%,i£y" j|. ^f^/ ^y ? — -^— want that the liberty be granted to them to approach the Commissioner, Workmen Compensation and therefore claim petition be dismissed as not pressed. (4) fn view of the above statement, we are also of the opinion that it will be proper for the claimants to approach the Commissioner, Workmen Compensation Act, therefore we set-aside the impugned award and its findings and also dismiss the claim petition as not pressed with a liberty to the claimants to approach the Commissioner, Workmen Compensation Act. (5) In case, the claim petition is filed before the Commissioner under the Workmen Compensation Act the same shall be decided independently without being influenced by the findings given by the claims Tribunal. (6) For the convenience, it is necessary to mention that the date of accident is 11/6/2005 at about 1.15 p.m. the claim petition was fited on 7/10/2005 which was decided on 10/1/2008. The instant appeal was filed on 2/5/2008 and is being disposed of today i.e. on 28/2/2011 with a liberty to approach the Commissioner undertheWorkmen Compensation, Act. (7) The petition is disposed of accordingly. Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge s&f- t^tt10ar judge •^