:i^: cy^ ^ IN THE mOH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH JUDICATURE: BILASPUR DivJ3io'ii:B8nch 3MISG. APPEAL N0. 7^^/2003 APPELLANT /INSURER •./ I'^itional Irisurance Ccampany Ltd. Thiou^i: Its Q'anch MsaMger, Qlaspur(C3A£(ttisgarh) VERSUS- RESPONDENT/ /^LAIMANT ^^. .^^^- '^•A "'' / RESPONDENCT7 DRIYER >,2)- ./" Sntt. Ra©miMah^hwad, W/o Late Raj Kun-er Maiheshwari, Aged about 22 yescs, R/o Raiwada (Near hri<^e), KfchaiNagar, PS: MohanNagar, Tdisil & Hstt. Duxg (CKhsttisgarh) Ra^iuveer Sin^-i, S/b LaKman Sm^i, R/oBMWard, Isfeiveesn ]\feigar, Charouda, PS:Ehilai-3, Tehsil & Dlstt. Durg (C.G.) (Edva- of Bus No.M5-23/J- 0441) Kanker Roadways, Throu^i: Pre^ani Sin^i Gardia, S/o Yogendra Sin^i Gardia, Aged about 54 yeac^ R^o Civil Lmes, Raipur, Tdisil&Distt. Raipur(C.G.) (Re^sto-ed owner of Kankor Roadw^s Bus No.K4P-23/J- 0441) MEMO OFAPPEALUNDERSECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLESACT.198a J3WNER ^3). ^ysy^^ y~.^\ "&^%. 1 x^^-^ 1 't ~"^.,..J,J ^^-&€ /w. ^v ^ *< ^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR APPELLANT Insurer Misc. Appeal No. 966 of 2003 National Insurance Company Ltd. VERSUS RESPONDENTS : Smt. Ragini Maheshwari & Others Claimants APPEALUNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT DB: Hon'ble Shri Justice I.M. Quddusi & Hon'ble Shri Justice N. K. Agarwal. Present : Shri Sanjay K Agrawaf with Shri Sourabh Sharma, Advocates for the appellant. Stiri BP Singh, Advocate for respondent No. 1. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 7.10.2010) Per: I.M. Quddusi, J. Heard. 2. The appellant-lnsurance Company has filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the impugned award dated 29.07.2003, passed by the VIllth Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (FTC), Durg (for short 'the Tribunal') in Claim Case No. 27/2002 awarding compensation to the tune of Rs. 4,05,000/- to the claimant. Brief facts of the case are that on 08.03.2001, Rajkumar Maheshwari (since deceased) while going to Balod from Durg by his Scooter, the driver of Bus bearing registration No. MP 23- J/0441 dashed the scooter due to which Rajkumar Maheshwari succumbed to the injuries sustained in the said accident. The claimant i.e. unfortunate widow of the deceased filed a daim petitjon under Section 166 of the Act daiming Rs. ..^' 4. ^- •^ /. 8. y^ 13,75,0007- as compensation for the death of the deceased jn the said accident. The learned Tribunal on closed scrutiny of evidence led, material placed and the submissions made, awarded an amount of Rs. 4,05,0007- in favour of the claimant and against the appellant and respondent No. 2 & Sjointly and severally. Before entering into the merits of the case, it appears that the appellant/lnsurance Company has filed the instant appeal jn respect of the quantum and negligence. However, permission under Section 170 of the Act to contest the claim on all available defences was not granted to the appellant-lnsurance Company and this fact has not been disputed by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant/lnsurance Company. Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of National Inswance Company Ltd. vs. Nicolletta Rohtagl an<f others; reported in 2003 (3) TAC 293 (SC), has held In para 31 of the judgment which is reproduced as under: "31. We have already held that unless the conditions precedent specified in Section 170 of 1988 Act is satisfied, Insurance Company has no right of appeal to challenge the award on merits ...." In view of the above settled position, the instant appeal filed on behalf of the appetlant/lnsurance Company in absence of the permission under Section 170 of the Act, 1988 is not maintainable and the same is dismissed as such. Sahu ^w^ Sd/- I.M. Quddusi Judge Sd/- N. K. Agarwal Judge