0 (‘ HIGH COURT OF CIEIATTISGARH, BILASPUR DB: Hon’nm 301nm a. Lu. Mimuunnrw; Qunoust as JJ MISC. APPEAL “ No.846 OF 2006 b \ l ‘ > APPELLANT Chamaru A11, s/o Late Sham§her Ali, aged about 65 years, r/o villagc JV Pacheda, RS. Abhanpur, Distt. Raipur(C.G). ' Vs. RESPONDENT Smt. Jaya Chandra, wik of Lats G. Chandra, thmugh Tanm Chamxjea Mayor, R/o Ravi Nagar Ward, Raw‘ur (0.6% . r Pommn-‘gonAl‘.) (14.06301 1) Per LM. QUDDUSI, J 1. This appeal has been Elsa by the claimant agdnst the impugned award datcd 30th July, 2005 passed by thc IX Addl. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (F.T.C), Raipur (CG) dismissing the claim petih'on of the appellant. 2. Brief facts of the case as per the version of claimant am that on 8.5.2001 at about 11.45, one Maruti Omm' bearing l Regn.No.M.P. 23-L.A/ 1881 which was being driven by the original mspqndent in a rash and negligent manner dashed Jakir Ali, son of the claimant, as a result of which Jam Ali died on the spot. At the time of accident, the deceased was young and energetic boy. He was working as Teacher and J 1 was earning. Rs.3100f— per month.“ Thc‘ claimant heing dependmt/ legal representative has filntiv the‘claimrpetitian“ for the award of compensation to fhr hme of Rs.5,75,000/- on van'ous heads.‘ The learned. Claims, Tribunal hasx 3 dismissed the claim pctimSn holding that it is not pmved that the vehicle of the husband of the respondent was involved in "\ the accident. 3. In fact the vehirle number andfe mke oithc; which; have: been shown difemntly. 7 In the FIR mmally ithns been mentioned that itai§as a'Tempo Tiax beaiing‘Regn. N01 :M.P. 23/ 1881 Whereas; later on “L'E' was added befom the Im l er 1881 and thereafter application for conection was'made as ‘LA’. In fact, the vehicle wasvl'not identioedi, Thepoheealso %d final Ieport dmppinglthe' case as the vehicle involved in; the accident conhi not be traced. out. No eyewitmss to 'ihe incident-waspmduced. .Hence, theiclaimnnt‘was unahle to pmve his case claiming compensation. 4. Therefore, the appeal isxdismissed. No-order as-to cost(s). 5. However, since .me wdeeeasedadied due to accident occuned ‘ with ans unlmmn .vehicm; this win. not pmclude the: Appellant] Claimant“ to' move . an.» - application- 'befoxe the competent anthon'tyv'u/‘sa 163 ofthe Motor Vehieles Act whinh provides for paymentof compensationin caseof hit and run motoraccidentsr . Sdl‘- Sd/- I.M.Quddusi G. Minhajuddin Judge Judge Rao