<3) ^ IN THEHIGH CQURTJ)F JIIDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH MISELLANEOUS APPEA^O. - ^\°i OF 2006 (MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988) ABPELLANT -^LAIMANT RESPONDENTS ]^ /NON-CLAIMANTS /.. ^ l?" ^y/ ^.w^-"" ^\\^.<?- f £^i-*'' \ **' 5^f ^^w ^^ »!" .••' > 3; ^Dr.A.K. Bhoite, aged about 55years,S/o K.M. Bhoite, R/o- House No. - J-3, Sector -, Avanti Vihar, Telibadfaa, Raipur, District— Raipur(C.G.) VERSUS Chovaram Nishad S/o Bhagwani Nishad aged about 22 years, R/o- New Purena, Nearthe Church, Telibandha, Raipur, Tehsil & District - Raipur (C.G.) Smt. Hamida Bano Khanani W/o Moh. Arif Khanani, R/o- Near the Pavara Ghowk, Bairan Bazar, Raipur, Tehsil & District- Raipur(C.G.) The New India Insurance Company Limited, Through Divisional Manager, Divisional Office No. 1, Madina Building, Kutchery Chowk, Medical College Road, Raipur, Tehsil & District-Raipur (C.G.) MEMORANDUM QF APPEAL UNDERSECTION 173 OF THEMOTOR VEHICLES ACT. 1988 II XI-HC-78 an^T^lf^IRi asiTan^rgiiri^l V/ Jf E\ *IIHCTI Sbtligi 3 T-<ll''<l<'1i|,^Tnwi<i, Rjdiy^' . .yv'^;..f^) s.i3) <y ^ 200^ 3n^?r ciggr (^ciF^sj^ir) TOfrwHf?(T3n^T wife^r miRft'?•'fet^<f3p[CT; •^srt^lTgn^T 09.tt.2006 Appellant by Shri Shivend|< Pondya, Advocate. I.A.No.3412 of 2006 fc|r taking document (synopsis) on record isoltowed. Heard on admission. The only point urged by tljie learned counset for the q>pellant is thtrt the compensatfon o«»ard|edby the lewned M.A.C.T. for the damoge systained to the Car|of the appellant is not Just <md reasonabte. However, wi a care|ful perusal of paras 9 and 10 of the impugned award, it is crystal c|ear that the appelltint did not lead any evidence or make any sttrtjement before •the learned M.A.C.T. relating to the expenses incuifred on repair of the Cw. It also appears that the documents ^-6, 7 ond 8 were mere estimates given by Diamond Motors for ^he repairs to be undertoken on the Cor of the appetlant. No evi^lence wws adduced to prove these documents. Learned M.A.C.T.] after a careful perusat of the estinwtes as olso the phot«|r^phsof the Car of the appelkint has also come to the conclusion | that ttie documents flled by the appellant are false. In this view of the n)<rtter, no ground is made out for admission of tiils appeal whjch is devoid of merit. Apped is accordingly dismissed. No ord^r as to costs. Sd/- Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh Judge <v<0 m