mime»: Wm IN THE HON BLEHIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR mother Rukhni, W/o. Pandit Ram Chauhan, aged about : ._..ai?i’“ (WW?0& 40 Labourer, years, R/o. Occupation Village ' Bhupdevpur‘ Bilaspur, Tahsil Kharsiya Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) x M.A. (C)No. M14 /2008 (gag APPELLANT/ Ravishankar‘ S/o. Panditram CLAIMANT Chauhan, Caste : Gada, aged BEFORE THE about : 15 years, Occupation : TRIBUNAL Student, Minor Guardian through VERSUS RESPONDENTS 1. Santosh Kumar Soni, S/o NON~ L Kunkun Prasad Soni, aged APPLICANTS about : 31 years, Occupation : BEFORE THE Driver, R/o. Ranisagarpara TRIBUNAL ward no. 9, Sakti, Tahsil Sakti, Distt. Janjgir‘ Champa (C.G.) Driver & owner of the offendingvehicie. 2. National Insurence Company Megma, Divisional No. 15, Gate No. 4, 6th Floor (Poddar Court) 18, Ravinandra Sarni, Cuicutta 700001 Insurer of the Offending Vehicle Valued at Rs. 5,00,000/— Durga BaE @ Roopmati Chauhan, D/o. Late Panik Ram aged about : 32 years, 0ccupation : House Hold Lady R/o. Chhote Atarmuda Raigarh, Permanently R/o. Panjari Plant, P.S. Chakradhar Nagar Raigarh Tahsil and Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) Amount Awarded Nil by dismissing the claim getition by the W ...... Learned Tribunal on 31.10.2007 Fixed Court Fee of Rs. 15/- %§<ed APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF MOTOR VEHICLE ACTK/ 1988 w” .ILIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR M. A. 1C! No. 164 of2008 Appellant Ravishankar Versus Respondents Santosh Kumar Som' 86 others {LPPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 19§§ DB: Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotn' 8n Hon’ble Shn' Justice N. K. Agarwal, JJ (Respondent No.1) of the vehicle Tata Sposio, bearing Iegisttah'on Na. QG. 11-3/6867. adopted by the deceased Basanta Chouhan. appellant/claimant had produced wimesses to the extent that on the 6th day ofhis birth, he was adopted by the deceased. wwmmmwmwmwm failed to prove the adoption as well as dependency, as continued to remain with his natural parents, 11'11 death of the deceased up to the a§e of 16 yeaxs. The alleged deed of adoption was executed after death of the deceased. 5. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the paru'es and having perused the pleadings and original documents available in the record of the ’I‘n’buanl, it is evident that the appellant was never adopted by the deceased Basanta Chouhan, as he continued to remain with his natural guardian, till death of the deceased up to the age of 16 years. Except some oral evidences that he was adopted by the deceased on the sixth day of his birth, no other document is produced. It appears that the execution deed was executed after death of the deceased, which has no relevance and meaning as it could not be executed after death of the deceased. The fact remains that the appellant] claimant never stayed with the deceased and he was not, in any case, dependent on the deceased. Thus, the appellant does not, in any way, come under the category of being dependent of the deceased. 6. The nndings recorded by the Tribunal and the impugned award are unexceptionable and do not suh‘er nom any irregularity and ‘ illegality. The Tribunal has properly considered all the evidences and has come to just conclusion. 7. For the reasons afore—stated, we are of the View that no interference is warranted with the impugned award and as such, the appeal is dismissed. No order asto costs. Sd/— “ta; Satish K. Agnihotri N’Kjngarwa: Judge ”“199 Thakur