^StfBN^- 'NlNIII^"' HIGH COURTOF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR© Appellants CJaimants MlscellaneQus Aopeal (C) No^BQCa»8 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Resoondents Driver (Ownert flnsurert Smt. Uivashi, aged about 30 years, W/o Rajendra Kumar Yadav. Suraj, e®edabout 12 yeare.SA) Rajencjra Kumau'Yadav. Ku. Arti, aged atout 9 yeare, Dfo Rajendra Kumar Yadav. Ku. Kiran, aged alMut 6 yeare, Dfo Rajendra Kumar Yadav. Neeraj, aged about 4 yesurs, Sfo Rajendra Kurnar Yadav. Deepak, aged about 2 yeare, S/o Rajendra KumarYadav. Appellant No.2 to 6, through to natural guardian mother Smt. Urvashi W/o Rajendra Kumar Yadav, R/o yiltage Hadha, P.S. Shivrinarayan, Tahsll Pamgarh. District Janjgir -Champa (C.G.) Versus 1. Johan, S/o Nankuram SiGtar, aged about 45 yeare, R/o Village-Parshpali, P.8.- BBaigarh, Dietrid Raipur (Driver) 2. RohitKumarDewangan,S/oJaN iharta( Dewangan, Bitaigarh, Dtstrict Raipur (C.G.)(VehteteOwner) 3. The New Indta Insurance Ccynpary Limited, Branch Blaspur, C.G. Aopeal under SecUon 173 ofthe Motor Vehides Acfc 1988. Present : Shri Kal^an Kaiamkar, counsel for the ^pellants. ORALORDER (Passed on 04* Mareh, aW) Heard on admission. (2) In this appeal, the appellants pray for enhancement of"an awaffd clated 26-12-2007 passed by the Adctittonal Motor Accidents aaimB TribudBl, Janjgir, Di^rict Janjg<r-Champa (henceforth *lhe MACT") in Claim Gase No.9QC006 whereby in a deaft case, compensation of R8.3,99,400/- was av^irded. (3) The MACT noticed a discrepancy r^iarding the age of the deceased in the statement of cl^imant/widow-Smt. Urvashi <hat she v»saged 30 years and 2- l^ her hu^sand was 15 y^irs elder to her whlte the posfrnorton report showed the age of the deceased as 30 years. Qi the basis of sheer guesswork, the MACT assessed the age of the deceased at 45 years and awsrded compensation of Rs.3,99,400/-. (4) Learned counsel for the appellants submltted that he has filed an application for taking documwts on record whereby he has fited frie mark sheets Annexure A-2, A-3 and A-4 of the deceased showlng his date of birtti as 11-08- 1967. It was fijrttier sulynitted that if friis was to be (»nsider^l,the true age of the deceased on the date of accjdent would be 39 yeare. Learned counsel for the appeUants pra^d that after setting aside ttie impugned awarct, Ihe matter be remanded to the MACT with a directton to gwe an opportunjty to the claiments to adduce evidence relating to age of the deceas^J. No other point was urged. (5) Havjng heard teamed counset for the appellants/claimants, 1 sun of the consfclered oplnion that it js a frt case where this appeal couU be disFX^ed of at the stage of admission without notice to the responcterrts. The findir^ of the MACT relatlng to age of the cteceased is purdy fc^ised on guesswork and the appellants/dajmants are now in a position to acteluoe documentary evidence in that regard. For dolng complete justice and for ^sesslng just affttl reasonable compensatlon, ttie matter is remitted to ftie MACT with a direction fiy issutr^ nottee to the parties and to give an opportunlty to the Glaimants to adduce dooumentary evidence relating to age of tie deoeased and also to give a reasonabte opportunity to the re^ondents to tead evidence jn r^iuttal. (6) The appeal is altowed. Sd/- Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh Judge ( U\.U'>^4^'^