n “ Mslon BenE ’ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH A BIT-AQPUR (C G ) Mlscellaneous aEEeal NO ’g./200€ \i 3K? MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLE ACT 1988. ‘ ‘ ELLANT. fRoshan Slngh S/o Late shri Rajendra Singh aged about 22 years, residence of Deshlahara &» f5; coloney (Sindhi Colony) Durg Thana Mohan Nagar tahsil & Dist. Durg (C.G.) Qq‘ e? Q6? §aa / 35‘“ IRESPONDENTS (Driver) . 4/1 § Abhishekh Sharma S/o Shri Vijay Sharma, aged about 21 years, (Owner) . 2);? Vijay Sharma S/o Shri Phoolchand Sharma, aged about 55 years, Both resident of H.I.G.l/332,Purani Borsi, tahsil & Dist. Durg-‘(C.G.) 3. («The Oriental Insurance Company (‘4/ Limited, Branch Supela, tahsil & Distt. Durg (C.G.) . W............lS, mm (Wu) a?” rmm @i‘umm \ mmm V mmwh‘fwm %Wm The Instant appeal ha Lbeen preferlfed by the appellant, seeking award of compen ation against the award dated 65.04.2005, passed by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Durg (CG) (for short 'T ibunal’)_.in claim case No. 114/04. The brief facts of the ca e according to appellant are that, on ’ 09.10.2003, while the appellan was going to Railway Station, one Bullet Motorcycle, bearing regi tration No. CG-07/ZN-1705 dashed the appellant due to which the ppellant sustained injuries ’ The appellant preferred an application before the Tribunal under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation to the tune of Rs. 1,36,000/- account of the said accident. The Tribunal, on a clos scrutiny of the evidence led by the parties, the material available on record, and submissionsof the i parties, dismissed theclaim of t V'e appellant hence thisappeal. , Shri Patel learned couns l for the appellant would submit that the learned Tribunal has err d in dismissmg the claim of the ' appellant/clalmant S.B. Han’ble Shri Justice N.K. A arwal 03.11.2009 ‘ Shri RS Patel Advocate or appellant Shri None for responden No 1 & 2 Shn HS Patel Advocate orrespondent No 3 Heard on admission r the injuries sustained by him on l 1 o i have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and perused the record. ' On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the learned Tribunalthas framed five issue _; recorded evidence and thereafter recorded a categorical finding t (at the Bullet Motorcycle CG-OT/ZN- 1 705 was neither involved in th accident nor accidentoccurred due to rash and negligent driving o driver ef the said motorcycle. The claimant failed to prove injury s stained by him in the said accident and dismissing the ‘claim. ' Shri R.S. Patel, learned ounsel for the appellant codid not > substantiate the grounds take in the memo of appeal and was unable to. point out any gr und whatsoever in his support. Moreover, the appellant has no examined any doctor to provethe injuries alleged to be sustained .y him and, therefore, on this count also the learned Tribunal wa justified in dismissing the claim preferred by the appellant. _ For the reasons mentione above, l do not find any sdope for interference in the award pass d by the Tribunal. Therefore, the appeal filed by the appellant is li ble to be and is hereby dismissed. Sd/— N.K.Agarwal Judge Sahu %¢ / A ‘‘ . KTW @- mm M& (5/ Ezooé I mwqahaiw) H. ax? “e; ~ - A, “a“mam‘ -1.» Wwaeam ramm