HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PBTITIOK (Art. 2271 N0. 3848 OF 2011 PETITIONBR: 1. NON-APPLICANT N0. 1 PBTITIONER: 2. NON-APPUCANT N0. 2 RI58P011DBNT: Claimaiit No« 1 RB8P011DENT: Clamiant No, 2 RB8PONDBNT: ClamiantNo< 3 RB8POMDBNT: Claimaat No, 4 Versus 1. 2. 3. 4. RB8PONDBNT: Non-Applicaiit No. 3 5. Laxmi Prasad, S/o Ram Leela Sahu,( aged about 21 years, R/o village' Hataevra, Tahsil Chaiapa, District Jaajgir-Champa (CG). Sumitra Sahu, D/o Aaitrag Sahu, aged about 22 years, R/o Chiknq>ali, Via Bhaisma, Post Sarkhaii, Distdct Janjgir Chainpa (CG), Dauraxxi Kanwar, S/o Iti^ari Kanwar, aged about 48 years. Sxnf. Naiiki Noai, W/o Daiiram Kanwar, aged about 44 years. Ku. Gayatd Bai Kanwar, D/o DaTU'am Kaawar/aged about 17 years. Ku, Lakeswari Kaawar, D/o Dauram Kaawar^ aged about 14 years. Respondents No» 3 & 4 arc mmor throu^h. fheir xiatural guaaxliaii J^her Daiiram Kanwar, S/o Itwsai Kaawar^ aged about 48 years, Respondents No, 1 to 4 are caste Kanwar, R/o village Dadarkala, Talisil Kartala, District Korba (CG). National Insurance Compaay, Meenu Conxplex, Kosabadi, Korba, TahsU & Distodct Korba (CG). 2. 3. WRIT PBTITION UNDBR ARTICLB 227 OF THB CCH18TITUTIOM Oy INDIA. (8B :Hon»bleMr. T.P.Sharma, J.) Present:- Shri S.R.J. Jaiswal, Advocate for the petitioners. Respondents not noticed. ORAL-ORBBR (Passedoa 18/07/2011) By this petition iiader Article 227 ofthe Constitutloii oflndia petitioaers have challenged fhe legalily and piopriely offhe order dated 23/6/<2^>11 passed by Motor Accident Clafcms Tribuiial, Korba ia claim case No. 80/2009 whereby Tribunal has awarded iaterim award under ^ctk>n 140 of the Motor Vehteles Act, 1988 ( ia short 'fhe Acf) as a no fault liabiUty against the wrong doer i.e. owner ofthe vehicle caused accident resulting mto deafh ofLakeswm* Kanwar. Order, memo ofpetition perased. Leamed counsel for fhe petitioners are heard. ^ 1 ^-^.^ 4. -^ While passing fhe aforesakl order against the owner of the vehicle i.e- petitioaer No, 2 es^ciatly in fhe Ught offact fhat petitioner No. 1 who not hayiag Ucense to drive the vehicle was drivmg fhe vehicle in coxitraventfon to the condition of the insuraace, I do not find aoy flleg^lity ia the order awardmg iaterim compensation as a no fault Uabitity uiider Section 140 offhe Act Consequently, petition is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismis8ed> No order as to costs. Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge