^ ^^ ^l^fjJ^ ^ wwe ,s ?*.*•"< U •»(' '(•-^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPLTR: C.G. M.A. N0. [7.^'?- OF 2004 MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL UNDER SECTIOP^173, MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 Appellant: y4Sfon-Applicants 5 Respondents: > &y Kf^t/ wy /A ^y^ y^/ <?'^y <~. United India Insurance Co.Ltd., AnuparwChowk, Jagdalpur, Through Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Co.Ltd. Versus ^l. Ranjeet Biswas S/o Surendra Biswas R/o Dantewada District South Bastar, Dantewada. v<- ^.. ^, Shri Gopinathan S/o Keshwan, ^? R/o New Market, Bacheli, DistrictDantewada. 3. Vinay Kumar S/o Kirtan Kumar R/o Type -1, Bacheli, District Dantewada. 4^ Deepak Kumar Yadav S/o D.R.Yadav ' ^ R/o Bacheli, District Dantewada. — Non-AppUcants 1 to 4 Raman Kumar Sahy, C/o Deepak Kumar Yadav S/o Kirtan Yadav R7o Bacheli, District Dantewada. — Non-Applicant No.6 ^y-; 6.c Smt.Sukinati Wd/o Late Shri Balaiya ^ R/o Murga Bazaar, Bacheli District Dantewada. 7.^ Vijay Chunnem S/o Late Balaiya R/o Murga Bazaar, District Dantewada. — Applicants Claim in appeal for setting aside the interim award, ^- >>- . ?v^ ValuedatRs.50^00/-^-t^JL-'s;'re-6/- :\T"'"| j Fixed Court Fee affixed Rs.15/- (Receipt reeardine deposition QfRs.l2,500/-as required under sectiorrf73. M.V.Act.i 1;988).;, ,„ L^m^l. nm •7.- 1^<« Being aggrieved^iy award, dated 9.8.20(^4 in Claims Case No.156/2003, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal South Bastar, Dantewada, the appellant prefers this appeal on the following facts and grouads: --• vss vs F1B*5£5tlBE? XI-HC-22 75T •^11*11^*1, aflld'is, (siMi'yy 3n^' ^^ - ^-, f ). .iYl.&...iyA..J..Z_^ 'ZP .^ "g^ 100 / wreir g»»n<»> fq^T' sn^rw [<•<[+ sn^r ^•4 •^fl raju sn^i ^RIIS^'ofet appellfent 15/02/2006 ShriSanjay S. Agrawal, Couns^l Shri Praful Bharat, Counsel for| None for other respondents. Leamed counsel'for the of this appeal final award has been p4i has-become infructuous, to which No. 6 and 7 did not oppos'e. Considered. The appeal is dismissed as infn|ii In the light of above order, hearing stands disposed of. <tii'i|f<'t41-i tiw'S ^ fs^S <Fiit&i< ^aTpgiTa.ni^r for the aiioellant. the respondents No. 6 and 7, submits that during pendgncv 4.ssed, therefore, the instant appea! l^ai-ned counsel for the respondents infntctuous. |A No. 393/2006 for out of tum Sdf- V.K-Shrivastava Judge i