<.p c M.A.(C.) No.../..->.(.->../2009 IN THE HIGH COURT^F JUDICATURE OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR APfELLANT r ^<3 %. o^"t- _^^ ^^•••- ^'v 1^-^ RESPONDENTS 5mt. Gurmit Kaur aged about 42 years, W/o Late Prithipal Singh, Occupation House wife, R/o Birsawarkar Nagar, Hiraput, Post Tatiband, Police Station Amanaka, Raipur TahO & Distt Raipur (C.G.) VERSUS 1) ^ Haricharan Salotra @ Bittu, Aged .y '" about 28 years, S/o Darshan Salotra Occupation Truck Driver, R/o Asam, Gujrat Carriers Ring Road, No. 1 Tatibandh Raipur (C.G.) ^) Amrik Singh S/o Baxis Singh ^ Occupation Truck Owner, R/o Asam, Gujrat Carriers Ring Road, No. 1 Tatibandh Raipur (C.G.) ,3) The New India Insurance Company Ltd., Through : Divisional Manager, Division Office No.l, Kachahari chowk, Jail Road, Raipur Tahsil 85 District Raipur (C.G.) Policy No. 450300/31/04/02629 MEMO OF APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF MOTOR VEHICLE ACT 1988. ^ ^-^' 37T^r^T fa'tjcb '3Tlt?T 5h*iict»fiRa -^ -ys( ^NH^, ^ftWTS. ^wy 3nif?r TIST^ M^/o ^i. rr/ 3TT^T ^dl^K ^a SS. Hon'bSe Shri Justjce N.K. AAarwai CFase 07-12^009 ? i Shri S.K.-Guha, counsej for the i-ieard on {.A. No. Q1, appjjl ffllng the appeal. i ; On due consJdeFation,; I anl ^succeecied ;jn explaining the caut Thererore, fhe appiicatjon is aMowt the appea! is hereby condoned. j-learcjonadmissjbn. Feefing aggrieyed by the avdi Ninth Addftional Motor AccJdeht Cj«l short 'the Tnbunal') in Claim whereunder an amount pf Rs.©,00((/- respbndents for the ^amages^ cau^ dajmanS. The facts bnefly stated are as The appejjant js the owner No.CG 04/ZC-072S. The sai^ vehJcSe N6: OG 04/A-9147 which w^ ItiS time 6f accldenf, resultjng 1n by thedaimant. The appeiiant preferred an the Motor Vehides Act (for short towards damage caused to the said 4ilAlId^lrl 'HPT^f^ fs^ <Fai<^i< ^T ^lFaH 3TT^T appeiiant. ;at!on for condonation of deiay in satisfied that the: appellant has se of delay in fling the appeai. sd and the cjelay caused in filing tard dated 24-01-2009 passed by [lirns Tribunal (F.T.C.) Raipur (for No.51/2007 whereby and |/- has been awarded against the |ed to the vehicle owned by the so|ne under: ; the vehide bearing registratjon met with an accldent- with is insured by respondent No.3 at damages to the truck owned df vehicJe Ipplication under Section 166 of 'fhe Act') daiming Rs.2,a),000/- Nhicje. ^j 3a a :M HC-22 'STT^T'^T f^n^3T^T ^^TW^I Kvr i-.^..,...«......4.....:-^.--.-^-^. -T5? -^TqRR, '^^PT®.Ic«twy NWTO^NICb 3^9T x^^ - 1 y^AC.t) f^. i^ )^j ^........,.....,,..................«^ ^^ fci-b^ •^N^pNtTFMf"?ft^ <Rn<$i< ^ sti^JFl 3?TT^[ The learned Trlbunaj on aprf place^ on record and submjssionsl ieiincSling evidenc®has been ledj^ jdamag^ IQ; tbe saki vehide re^ app^ltent. ; Hov^ver, despite no ] JappeUant, Rs.6.000/- has beeo aw ^vehjcte.^. .,.!.,.....,..;........:..,..;...,........;:'.... »reciation6f evldence ted, materiai made by thelparties found that no the appeliant to substentiate any |ulting in monetary ioss to the |evJdence has been Jed by the ^rded towards the damage to the ..,.,;L.earo^ci. counsei: appearin^.for the appeliant-would submit 'that the awar<f tQwards the darnag4s to the said;vehicje (truck) is on lowerjslde and de9erves.to be^enNnced.- . M:,,..^:.. . 1 have hear^ learned ooun^l for the appellant and perused the impugned ayyanj. ;On a bare pe[usa! of the av(? jndisputabiy the»8ppelJant dic!;not any loss occurredl,., Even.there js.';rt has awarded Rs.S,OQO./- towa.rd dafit without any.basls.. ,.•.-,. , 'in vsew.of thel:above, I: do'.rt(ot flnd any merit • In the - appea! for .enhancement':ofthe'compens^.tjon awardec by-the.TrJbynal. • fard impugnedwould reveai that adduce evidence to substantiate o ..eySdence, the learned Trlbunal |ages to the truck which-js.also in The-appeailf11ed &y the-ap^ compe-nsation Is therefore jjab!e:t) be and is heretsy djsmlssed. No orGera&'tocosts,'' "'':|"1 , ^d^~ N.K. Agrawal Judge e!?ant.:for 8R-hancement of the: [1qt^^%^ ^! ^ .^..^^^M^. is