HIGHCOURTORCj^ATTISGARHATSILASPUR Si!ffl!e_Be! h : Hon'bteShri Difip Raosahe&DesliimiAh. J. Resoondents Ciaimants MAJC.) No.llSIQOeS . The Orientet Insurance Company Limited, Timber Bhawan, Shop No^OS,' Raipur Road, DhaBifari,, ^[S^rKst Dhamtari(C.Qj - Vereus . 1. Tilak Ram S/o Dashlal Netam, Age 25 yeais, :: "" , . ."l';. ':'' .? 2. Sudan Bai, Wto Tilak Raro Netafc, Age23yeare, Both Resident of Vill^ge Matma, Tahsii Baderajpur, Thana Vishrampur, District Bastar (C.G.) 3. Dhanesh Kumar Sahu Sfc.Late Kamal Sahu, Caste Teli, ^^ 38 ysare, Residsnt of Krishna N^gar, Raipur (C.G^ (Vshicle Drivei), Present-Viliage Kundai, P.Q.Raighar; District Navrangpur, (Orissa) . 4. Shivnath Nag S/o aiikhari Ram, Resident of Tatibandh, Raiffpr. (Vehicte Owner) Appeai under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988. Present :1- . , - . :., . ss ' .: ,. Shri SudhirAgrawal, coynselfprthe appellant ORALORDER (Passed on this 21*' day of October, 2008) Resoondents Non-applicants Meard on admission. (2) The appellanVinsurer is aggrieved by an award dated 15-04-2068 passed by the AddiUonal Motor Accidents Claims Tribimal, (F.T.C.), Kondagaon, Bastar (hencefprtt "the Tribunal") in Cteim Case No.130/2007 whereby in a case of accidental death of a girt child aged 5 yesss, compensation of Rs.1,50.000/- was awarded. •y€3e^. z- ^. (3) geliance was placed by learned counsel for the appeltant on Kaushalya Defrt veisus Shri Karan Arora & OIRS., reported in 20Q7(4)s Supreme29. However. this Court has white placing lelianea OR Maiyu Deviand another versus Musaflr Paawian and asottier, 2005(1) TAC S09 (SC}:2005 ACJ 99 held^t/nfted Indla Insurence Co. t.td., vwsus Tihaiv and otftere vlde Order dated 07-07-2008 In MJ^fCjUo.aSS.of. 2007, Ramesh Kumar Singti and another veraus Kiwto Sw and anoffier vide Order dated 05-05-2008 ia M.A.Kto.307/1998 and New fndia Assurance Company Limlted versus Mfrfiamad HassaR Khan and Others vide Order dated 04-07-20W fn MJ'k.(C.)No.141/MOe Vhat compensation of Rs.2,25,000/- is adequate compensation m such cases, The case of Man/u Devi and another versus Musafir Paswsn and another (Supra) was not considered in Kaushalya Dwi versus Shri Karan Arora & Ors.,(Supra). In the prssent case, the Trtbunal has awarded compensation of Rs.1,50,(XX)/-. Leamed counsel for ttie appellant submitted that no appeal for enhancement of compensation has been preferred bythe claimants. (4) In this view of the matter, in my considered opinion, no ground for admission of this appeat is made <xit. Accordingly, the appeatis disraissed at the stage ofadmission. ~— —- c.u-— DUip Raosaheb Deshmukh Judge Tumane