•^-Wh IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR (C.G.( MISC. APPEAL ./6^^.. / 2003 liW inn Flsrs! •SJ^'& tL<S.^2E: APPELLANTS: CLAIMANTS 1. 2. 3. ^' RESPONDENTS KANHATVA RAM DHRU, AGE 36 YRS S/0 LATE GHANSU RAM DHRU, GOKUL RAM DHRU, AGE 33 YEARS S/0 LATE GHANSU RAM DHRU NAKUL RAM DHRU, AGE 20 YEARS S/0 LATE GHANSU RAM DHRU ALL R/Q VILLAGE CHAPORA, P.S. TUMGAON, TAHSIL & DISTT. MAHASAMUND (C.G.) VERSUS 1. N^ y.ff:'' ^•'•<'0.-'' ^ MOHD. SAFIQUE QURESHI, AGE 20 YEARS, S/0 MOHD SAREEF QURESH1, OCCUPATION 'KASAI" (SLOUTER) R/0 NAYAPARAWORDiNO. 4 MAHASAMUND. DRIVER OFTHE MOTOR CYCLE N0. M.P. 61/2712 DHARAM KUMAR BHARGAV, AGE 35 YEARS, S/0 HEMLAL BHARGAV BY OCCUPATION ADVOCATE ADDRESS, CIVIL COURT MAHASAMUND OWNER OF THE MOTOR CYCLE N0. M.P. 61/2712 THE NEW INDIAASSURANCE CQ. LTD. BRANCH OFFICE-2ND FLOORVIKAS PRADHIKARAN BAJRANG MARKET. G.E. ROAD, RAIPUR, DISTT. RAIPUR C.G. INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE VEHICLE MOTOCYCLE M.P. 61/2712 ^" MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL U/SEC. 173 M.V. ACT OF 1998 AGAINSTTHEJMPUGNED AWARD DT. 07/AUG/2003 PASSED BY FIRST MACTMAHASAMUND IN CLAIM CASE N0. 21/2002 1 .'-"'.^.'y'' ^^^•" •^' ^'" '^ ^' '3. /' s :B 1». sl?ljfe, i-.lu. ^•S.^fcK-.fMt.^,-.^^; £_;E^"^£J!f^f^S *S MilsM t;UUt T OF CHHATTISGARH. BSLASFUj c< M: Hon'ble Shri !.M. Quddusi, J ,J.& Hon'ble Shri Prashant Kumar Mlshra. J. inssnfnna UQ!»OT f. AF-PELl.ANTI RESPONDENTS Vs sunss Kanhaiya Ram Dhm and others. Mohd. Safique Qureshi and others. 173 OF THE MOTOR ^HjCLE^AC- App8af§riCS. Shri J.A. >ani, oounsel forthe Agrawai, Senior Advocate with Smt. Meera Jalswal counsel forthe respondent No.3. RD! Foilowing oral on M. Quddusi. -J. 24/01/2011 sr of the C-ourt was passes This appeal has been filed by the claimants against the impugned award dated 07/08/2003 of the First Additional Tribunai, Mahasamund (C.G.) passed in Ciaim C; their clairn petition h-as bee" dismissed. Motor Accident Ciaims eNo. 21/2002, whereby 2. The brief facts of the case are that on 30/12./2001 deceased Ghansu Rarn Dhruv was sittina in bicycle belonging to Shubham Khainivar and comtng from Sirpur to Chhapora. Near village Chhapora Sujuki motoreycie bearing reaistration No. M.P.-61/2712 being driven rashly and negiigently by non-appiicant No.1 dashed the bicycle from back side as a result of which Ghansu Ram Dhruv fell on the road and he received grievous injury on his head. He was admitted in Go\4. Hospitat, Mahasamund, ho'A'ever, iooking to his serious condition he was referred to Medical Coilege Hospltal, Raipur where he died on 04/01/2002. Deceased vvas working as Labour and w-as earning Rs.2500/- per mont'n. The ciaimants have claimed compensation of Rs.6,20,000,/-. 3. It is indeed correct that in the F.i.R. registration number of motorcycie v»'as not rnentioned but from the poiice investigation the eye Sfc,.<?"'r" 83113 3. i .-;LJ..IL;.^I ^ witness informed the police about the registration number and name of the person who was driving t'ne motorcycle as according to this witness the motorcycie owner was doing business of seiling and purchasing goats in reiation to his trade. In the witness box this witness namely AW/2 Hsmlal Gond has stated berore the Tribunal the number oft'ne motorcycle, its name i.e. Sujuki and he has also said that the pillion-rider Vishnu who was keeping two goats vvith him and because of the movement of the goats on ihe said wo wheeler t'ne two wheeler became unbaianced and committed accident. in the F.1.R. also this was mentioned that the driver of the motorcycle was a'rivino the motorcycie got unbalanced on the v/ay and this corroborates the contents ofthe F.I.R. Further the motorcycle coliided with cycie from behind. The police aiso filed challan against the driver-cum- owner ofthe motorcycie namely Safique Qureshi as one Dharam Bhargav Non-applicants No.2's witness No.2 had stated that he had sold out his motorcycle No. M.P. 61/2712 Max 100 on 02/11/2001 to Mohd. Safique Qureshi. 4. In vievy of the above mentioned facts and circumstances, v/e are of the opinion that the Tribunal has given perv'erse.finding and therefore She matter requires reconsideration at the end of the Tribunal. 5. In view of the above mentioned facts and circumstances. we set- the impygned aw-ard and remit the matter back to the Tribuna! for a'ecision afresh. 6. Neediess tb say that the Tribunal shall allow the p-arties to arnend the pleadings, to adduce further evidence, to fite documents or to get $he documents verifsed etc. and thereafter the claim will be decided afresh as eariyas possible. 7. The parties shali appaar befor®the Tribunai on 22 February, 2011. The Lower Court Record shall be send back without further detay. 8. The is allowea' in part. Sdf- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge .'^L