^,- f ^1 ^ IN THE ^GH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR (CG) \ \ Misc- Appeal No- ys'^ of 2006 SingFg Beneh APPELLANT- . ^K.L.Katakwar S/o Resham Lal R^SP<9NX^^T ,.\ _ . , . . ^ O / ~ "„ \/^(\f Katakwar, aged about ^years, Kendriya .^^" ;TK;;::,:^r;:;r ^M^"" .A^W"' ^w Resham Tasar Kendra Lakha, Post Box No. 15 Raigarh, District Raigarh (CG). ^"^^> 'y RESPONDENTS r'LArM^^r D^^e f< ttJ-^tLBoT&^ ^s^ ^^T/o'.i' ^-^-f^^ rp^v&R^ <3-F Se.'^tS^ /^?* ^ ^7^^-^& VERSUS 1. Mohanmati Wd/o Jug Lal Chouhan, aged about 43 years, occupation dependent, resident ofVillage Padigaon, Thana Tamnar Tahsil Gharghoda , District Raigarh (CG). 2. Sukhi Ram S/o Chetan Khadiya , occupation cultivation and labourer , resident ofVillage Vijaypur, Tahsil and District Raigarh (CG). 3^ Gandhi Lal Dewangan S/o Meghram Dewangan, resident ofTarpali, Raigarh, TahsU and District Raigarh (CG). MEMORANDUM OF MI8C APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF MQTOR VEHICLES ACT F- XI-HC-78 *11*1<<11 SbHl^i •^i^M^, ^Tn^^Ko, f®idiy^< ^^-.A.^7.y.A&.^2()o 3T1^T q^^? (^f^^ST) w^T^rf^rw cT^TT 3TR?T ^RT^ IN l'- / 5;^TTW: ^TfN'W^ST 07/09/200S ShriY.V. RamanRao, 1| Heard on M.C.P.No. 1| the appeai as it has been fijed| For the reasons stated of 24 days in filing the appeal | This appeai is directe<| Claims Tribunal under Sectibiti sum ofRs. 50,000/- has beeh daimant and the liability h^s happens to be the registered the appeilant in the memo registered owner of the vehic|l Dewangan (respondent No. 3| by Sukhiram, CQurt beiow w^ the appeliant. After hearing iearned materiai availabie on record, merit and the same is liabl dismissed. ct)i^f<n41Ti Hn^ff ^f teT^t <[^^i< ^3Tf^R'3TI^T 9arned counsei for the appeiiant. 304/2006 for condonatson of delay in filing with the delay of 24 days. in the appiication it js aliowed and the delay s condoned. ^ against an interim award passed by the 140 of the Motor Vehicies Act by which a awarded as interim compensation to the s been fastened bn the appeiiant as he owner of the vehicle. The ground taken by f appeal is that though he is recorded as te, he has sold the same to one Gandhiial herein) and since the accident was caused s not justified in fasteningthe liabiiity upon ^ounsel for the appeilant and perusing the am of the opinion that this appeat has no |e to be dismissed and it is accordingly Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge P.T.O.