^ ».-^..; Slngh Bench IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR (C.G.) MISCAPPEAL fONO. f2.^ QF^OlOy^o 1 1 APPELLANT: foN-aAIMAINT ^ J^SPONDENTS: CLAIMANT ^ B^emlal Sahu S/o Budhram Sahu, aged about 28 Years, r/o. Village - Bhakhra, Thana - Bhakhara,Tahsil - Kurud. bistt.- Dhamtari, (C.G.) VERSUS Siyaram SahuS/o. Shri Brijlal Sahu aged about 37 Years, r/o. Village - Bhakhra, Thana - Bhakhara,Tahsil - Kurud, Distt.- Dhamtari, (C.G.) Nirmal Kumar Maheshwari S/o. Kishan Maheshwari, aged about 40 Years, r/o. Village - Bhakhra, Thana - Bhakhara,Tahsil - Kurud. bistt.- bhamtari, (C.G.) The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Through Branch Manager, Office Adarsh Bal Mandir, Near Panjabi Gurudwara Dhamtari, Tohsil and bistt.- bhamtari ( C.G.) MEMORANDUM OF MISC APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT. <?%^- ^••:'yy. '^'^ ".••r'A'^ ^^^^ ^-o°)' ^L HEGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MEsc. Appeal (0 No. 127 of 2011 PremlaiSahu fNON»APPUCANTJ RESPONDENTS/ CLAIMANTS Versus Ku. HarshaSahu and others. \ <f APPELLANT (NON-APPLICANTV RESPONDENTS^ CLAHVLANTS Mlsc. Appeai (C) No. 128 of 2011 Premjai Sahu Versus . • Siyaram Sahu and others. APPELLANT RESPONDENTS/' CLAlMANTS Misc. ADDsal (Ci No. 1 29 of 2011 .Premjal Sahu ^TSIIS •• . ' Sohaga Bai' and others. APPEALS UNDERSECTION 173 OF THE ^OTORVEHICLES ACT. 1988 f'SB: Hon'ble Shri N.K. AaarwaS. J.) Present: Shri Sunii Sahu, counselfor the appeijant. ORALORDER (Passed on 30th day of March, 201 1) Heard cn admission. 2. Since M.A.(C) No. 127/2011, M.A.(C) No. 12S/2Q11 & M.A.(C) No.129/2011 invoived same facts and question of !aw, are being disposed ofbythiscommon order. 3. These are owner's appeals against the award dated 20-10-2010 passed by Additional Motor Accident Ciaims Tribuna! (F.T.C.), Dhamtari/District Dhamtari (hereinafter rgferred to as 'the Tri C!aim Case Nos. 32/2010,. 39/2010 and 40/2010 whereby the iearned Tribunai has awarded a teta! sum of Rs.37,008/-, Rs.10,182/- and Rs. 21,015/- respectj.vejy. •^"^.. ^ 4. Brief facts of the cases are: on 26-04-2009 at-about 1-30 P.M.. respondents/ciaimants herein namely Ku. Harsha Sahu, in CEaim Case No.32/2010, Siyararn Sahu ih Claim Case No.39/2010 and Sohaga Bal in CEaim Case No; 40/2010 were going from Village Bakhra to Charabhata in connectEon with their reiative's marriage, by Commander Jeep bearing registration No. C.G. 04-ZD/096Q. Near village Paraswani Taiab, the said Jeep turned .turtEe due to rash and negjigent driving of the driver, as a resuit of Which the respondents/cEaimants sustained grievous injuries in the said accldent. 5. The claimants/respondents hereln have preferred ciaim petitions under Section 1S6 ofthe Motor VehlcEes Act, ciaiming compensation of Rs.2,25,000/-, Rs.80,000/- and Rs. 1,00,000/- respectjveiy under different heads for the Injuries sustained by them in the said accldent. 6. The tearned Tribunal on appreciation of evidence led, materiai placed and submissions made, held accldent had occurred due to rash and negiigent driving of the driver of the offendlng vehicte; exonerated the Insurance Company from Its iiabiijty for payment of compensation cn the ground, the poiicy was third pariy poiicy and the persons sltting in the private Jeep as gratuitous passengers v^ere not covered under the poiicy, awarded a totai amount of Rs. of Rs.37,008/-, Rs.10,182/- and Rs. 21,015A respectively, for the i.njuries sustained.by claimants In the said accident. 7. Learned counsej for the appellant would submjt in the absence of examlnation of Doctor, compensation awarded by the Tribuna! to the daimants in the above mentioned cases are onhigher side which deserves to be suitable reduced. 8. ! have heard iearned counsel for the appejlant and perused the award impugned. 9. The tearned Tribunai after appreciating the materia! on record and the medicat biils produced by the daimants, awarded theabove mentioned amounts as compensation to them. 11 is not a case where without examjning the doctor, learned Tribunai has held: claimants are permanentjy djsabled. The compensation was awarded on the basis of expenses suffered by the dalmants and injury reports filed, which appears to be just -and reasonabie in the facts and cjrcumstances.of the case. ^. Kvr 10. Learned counsel for the appejiant dld not dsspute the exoneration of the Insurance Company in as miuch as the dajmants were sitting in the private Jeep as gratuitous passengers which were not covered under the poJJcy. 11. in view pf tne above, 1 do not flnd any iljegality in the award impugned passed by the learned Tribunai. The appeais being devoid ofsubstance, iiableto be and are herebydismissed. Sd/- N.K. Agarwal Judge t,!:;