XI-HC—78 3^'"41<<l<y><'<, ^Tfl'M'16, (slcil'y^ m'^ •C<-^ 2.-9 s" "WI^IT *NI<sb ------•••--••-•-•-••••••••-•••"••^ 200 ^ SVV^ VW (Ipf^Rtf) f&. STI^F W Rt-fi't] ^v snw *ii»h TOITW ^ft^T an^r ITS 1, 2. u •<c^iTiy • qil<<[<Tl*l1l HlH^lf tf^fe^ Tf^R^R '^sifinaii^r ^rbaash Sis.gh, S/ o-Indarstngh tiawala, R / o-Baldevbagha, lijnandgaoii (C.G.) (Owner) Kjrishn.a Balekar, S/o-Gajariaad jhalekar, Aged about 31 vears, C^ccupation Driver (Tinck) R/o- Vliflage Churiva, Rainandgaon, Ttilisil & Distt. Rajnandgaon (C.G.) (Ipriver) cu-i-1. :hchhar£ui 3out 42 griculture Aged S/o-Mabhodhi vears, Occiipation R/ o-NayaJsbaiidha, Ahaiipur) Tahsil & District Raipur ;.G.) (Claimarit) td. Oriental Braiich ajnaiidgaon lanager, Ml Hachaliaii ('ilnsurer) Conipanv Kamfhi luie, through Divisional Division Office Sa Chowk, Raipur (C.G.) Mr. Aailp Majuiiidajr, counsel for the appellailt. Mr. Vaninendra Mishra, coiinsel for respondent No.S/InsuiTaace Cotupaii.y FRHW Ifn"; XI-HC—78 g^q- ^w^ft^^ WTfl.y'Ko, fstrti+iy . r^ -^3 • Ccj 2^9-<T NWdl *41=h"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""W^ sn^?r v^v (ijqfg«Rsr) sn^rw h-u* j w sn^i a>*ii<* 'E^iiWHfer sn^T 2- - Keard on M.C.P.No.1778/ of dela;>~ ia film.g Qiis appeal as 402 as per ofiice aote dated applicatioii for exem-ption from. ( per provisions of Section 173 of \ Leanied couasel for the ai has beeii saddled witli the Ual thougli the vehicle was m.s'i respondent No.3 an.cl in these exem.pted frora depositmg the r^ Ou tlie appUcation. of c subinitted that the respondeut have coinpensated fh.e clainian^ be recovered froni the appellaij tiie notice of recoven" is. executl he leanit that liability of deposi] fastened upon tlie appeUaiit ai{ iinpugned award to prefer tliis davs has occurred. q-»N^41l •ifltR'if^fe^ <F>1^.1< i?3iRn aii^i 2006, appUcation for coadonation Ithe saiae has been with. a delav of (I.. 10.2005 aad I.A.No.3338/2006, jlepositing ttie amouiit of award, as Itlie Motor Vehicle Act, 1988. (ipeUaiit subinits that the appeUaiit |)iiity of payment of coiapensatioD. lired at fhe relevant tim.e with c4'cuiu.stances, fhe appeUant may be Iquisite am.ourtt ofaward. indonatioa of delay, it has beeu No.S/insuraitce coiapaiiy ought to first and thereafter, the sanie caii it/owuer. However, after receiviag -on proceedm.gs from. tb-e Tribuiial, ing the amount of award has been .d applied for cei-tified copy of tlie appeal aad as such, delay of 402 Leanied counsel for respojn.dent No.3 opposed both fh.e above applications. XI-HC—78 3^r •^wi'ft-i, v-^ww, ^fvftwy, ^-i/^-cc^ 2.^^- •Wl^T WTRT ••••--•--••••••••••••••"••-"•••'•-'••••--^ 200 ^ an^r inra (ipf^g^w) ^^ sn^r ^T ft-fich ^TKJT 3n^?r sh+oqi t^»-, » Wiiw^feisn^r 3 - Tlie reasons assigned fo appeal are absohitely uiiteuabl sufficient. So far as exenipti award in. teniis of Section 17: deposit is precori.dition for film filed on 25.9.2006, however, Section 173 of the Act has not lu ttte tesult, both the substaace, are disiuissed. Q disiaissed. •*iiAii<vi-41Ti TnTRTf ^Fs^ ^R^I< '^aiRpTgn^r condouio.g tlie delay iii filiiig tiiis ^, the same are neitlier bona&de nor pn fronj. depositm.g the auiount of of the Act is coiicen.ied, the above ^ the appeal. This appeal has beeu. tlie statutoiy payinent in tenns of lieen niade. above application betiig devoid of >nsequently, the appeal .also stands ^A _ _ Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge