ii' jl IN THE HIGH COURTOFJUDICATURE AT BILASPUR(C.G) Uéé MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO. 2004 i ‘55 W ' Miscellaneous ppeal unéerlsediODE/g Motor Vehicle Act 1288 l l r i A APPELLANT CLAIMANT 0/ Ramlal Dhritlahare, S/o. Roop Das Dhrif’abafc, Aged abouf 45 years, R/o. Posf Lania, (Mafiya) P‘S‘ Kbarora, Disfricf Kaipur (CG) VERSUS KE§PQNDENTS Kamfa Prasad, S/o, Darashram Chafuwedi J‘ ON~APPLIC§§T§ : R/o.Village 8t Posf Sundervan, Tahsil & i P.S. Palari, Districf Kaipur (CG) 2) Lekhan Ram Sonkevare, S/o.Phiranfa Ram / Sonkevare, R/o. Village & Posf Sundervan, P.S. Palari, Disft‘ Raipur (CG) 5) Thc New India Insurance Company Ltd” / Through fhe Divisional Ma nager,‘ a“; Qv Q53 Kachahri Chowlf, Jail Road, Raipui (CG) Gopal HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ‘Sihhle Behch: Hon’ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Miscellaneous Appeal No.1166 of 2004 . Ramlal Dhritlahare Ap pellant Versus Respbndents Kamta Prasad and others PlJlesent: _ / lim S.C.Verma, counsel for the appellant. S he r Miscellaneous Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 $ a ORAL ORDER (Passed on 27‘“ September, 2010) r l l l g This appeal is for enhancement of the amount awarded by the aims Tribunal. 2 The learned Claims Tribunal. has awarded Rs.5,000/— as compensation to the appellant/claimant. Cl; i in paragraph 9 of the award, it is mentioned that x—ray report has not been filed by the claimant and the prescription slips are of the months of May,‘July and September, 2003, whereas the accident has taken place in November, 2002. The Claims Tribunal has, thus, ignored the said documents and has further observed that the treatin‘g doctor has not been examined by the claimant. 3} Even othenmse this appeal is barred by limitation and an application for condonation of delay in fling the appeal has not been moved for last Six years. 4i EFor the above rEasons, the miscellaneous appeal is i #_.~ ¥ i 1 i l i l disse r Prashant Kumar Mlshra . ‘ i i Judge \ a sw- i i i . Jhwsiit l... uw. “My." misd , (