A??ELLANT Nan-agplimm RESFONTEJR TS ,g Dhirendra Mishm. J. Heard. '2. Thaappeiiant has pmferred this appeai against the award dated 19 4 200:) passed by he em Acidmonal Motor Accmlent blalms Tribunal, Jagdaipur in Ciain Case No‘ 85/2004 whereby a sum of Rs. 94,000/— has been awarded s compensation to the Ciaimants for the 2 IA. N0. 813/2m35 M‘ti Ram. Sio. Sukkuram Markan, aged abaut 5O vgln R/n vinace Mandnk?v Khargaon, Police; QL iuh ruamgduu 141mm mundagaan, Distt. BaStaL oh _~..,.-.‘ *‘. 1 Y -_. Ja aalpur (L3) (Owner ol vemcle) V BI’SIIS adu Ram: Sfo. Shri Kola, aged about 4U wars L) varin Bai W70 Sukadu Ram, aged ‘38 wars 'manm R/n vmaue (‘h'kladeehnara 13$ H, ulhLL DdBLdl .. . *Ar— U xgann Pnlir‘e Qfation- Parsgaon, 1 Nuuagama, .J gnu pasta? Jagdabur CG) bhl‘l AVll'laSh K. NllSDI‘a AdV Oate IOI' the TESpODGEHES NO l and 2 NQnP appearq fgr rFQpQpdenf Nn Q A-rn-‘ur‘ UMHLK (194mm; i ) ‘ ‘1 TI..___L.- a h ( XI—H€—-78 W 3am, WW, . M440, g: 3 0200f“ WM in 200 W WWW WWWIWW %i ‘ m mm (1mm) (1 ‘ death of thsir daughter i Trolley bearing Regn. NC mspecuvaly owned by the 5 at th€ reievant time. 1’ Li. THE ground tgksn i V ‘Tribunai haS negi€ct€d thE statement oi the driv€r W Koshalya was run ovsr bV and there *‘Nas no neg‘ligem 4. On thé other han‘ submits that this objectior 1n paragraph '/ 01 ma awal ground that no such pleading was taken by the appellant in their COHIpeDSaUOH and lul‘tl'l€i‘ that 8.11 Off€DC€ dnver of the vehicle for rash and negligent nt resulting into death of Koshalya and he I n a motor acc1d€nt invo‘lving Tractor and . CG O4/ZQ/l375 and CG O4f'ZQ/‘1d'10 appellant anct cinVen by the. respondent No, )y the appeHant in this appeal is that the evidence adduced by the appellant and the no nave categoricany stated that deceased the tractor as she jumped from the tractor ‘-e on the part of the driver. :1, learned counsel for the respondents has been duliy considered bv the Tribunal d and the same has been over ruled on the reply to the application for was registered against the drlvmg and causing accide was prosecuted. o. ‘l‘ne reasons assigne application Ior compensati available on record. The iris'tant appeal being devoid of substance, is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. . DHEENDRA .MISHRA Judge d by the Claims Tribunal for rejecting the an are based on the evidence and material 5 , Sd/— .