:^%^r^^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Misc Apoeal No. fo3 /2005 8§nch Appellant /Applicant Respondents )n-Applicants : /Janakram Kaushik, aged about 60 yfs, S/o Ram Dayal-Kaushik, R/o - ^/iltage- Bodsara, Tahsil Takhatpur, -eistt.: Bilaspur (C.G.) - Versus V Rakesh Kumar Agrawal, S/o Balram Agrawal, R/o Gudhiyari, Tahsil & Distt: Raipur (C.G.) 2., Kushal Singh, aged about 30 years, S/o Bali Singh Kanwar, R/o Village Gidhauri, Post: Tilkeja Distt.: Korba (C.G.) 3.,/? The Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd. / ^through Branch Manager, Branch Office, Near High Court, Bilaspur (C.G.) Miscellaneoys Aepeal Under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act 1988 Beina aaarivecLbuJbe-autai HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MISC. APPEAL No. 103/2005 APPELLANT Janakram Kaushik (dead) through legal heirs. Versus RESPONDENTS Rakesh Kumar Agrawal and others SB:- HON'BLB SHRI N.K. AGARWAL. J PRESENT:- Shri Revindra Agrawal, Advocate, for the appellants. Shri Raj Awasthi, Advocate for the respondent No. 3. ORAL ORDER (6-4-2011) 1. Leamed counsel for the parties submit fhat the matter may be heard in the absence of respondents No. 1 and 2 and they are ready to argue fhe matter finally. Therefore the matter is heard finally. 2. This is claimant's appeal for enhancement of compensation against the award dated 7-10-2004 passed by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur in Claim Case No. 125/2003 whereby Rs. 20,000/- has been awarded to the claimant as compensation along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of application till its payment- on account of damage to property. 3. Facts of the case in brief are that in the intervening night of 21st and 22nd May, 2003 a truck bearing registration -No^ CG-04-G-1887 dashed the tractor and trolley owned by fhe claimant by driving the truck in a rash and negligent manner. In the accident, engine of the tractor and the trolley got damaged. The claimant preferred a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicl'es Act, 1988 claiming Rs. 1,10,646.05 as compensation on account of damage to property. The Tribunal on a close 7. 8. scrutiny of the evidence led, material placed and submissions made, held claimant had suffered loss on account of damage to property to the extent of Rs.20,000/- only and awarded the same along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of application till its payment. Shri Agrawal, learned counsel for the appellant would submit, the amount awarded is shockingly on lower side. On the other hand, ShriAwasthi, leamed counsel for the respondent No. 3 would submit, the appellant failed to prove any loss sustained by him on account of damage to his vehicle. The appellant had not filed estimates, survey report ai^d also did not examine the Tepairers who have issued bills, in the absence of which, claim was liable to be dismissed, however, learned Tribunal has awarded Rs. 20,000/- which itself is on higher side and the appeal deserves to be dismissed. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused fhe record of the Tribunal. For the reasons best known to the appellant, the appellant failed to produce survey report and report with regard to condition of the vehicle on the date of accident, and also failed to examine them as well as the persons who have issues bills. In such circumstances, since actual loss sustained by the appellant was not proved by him, I do not find any illegality in the award unpugned. For the reasons mentioned hereinabove, the appeal being devoid of substance deserves tb be and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- N. K. Agarwal Judge