IN THE HIGH COUKT OF )UDICATURE AT BILASPUR(C.G) Moi € a MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO. 2004 £1) San’t Kumar S/o Sri Gend Singh Aged about 22 y:ars,Occupa’dan— Kooli R/o Village— Jarway, Thana— Amanaka,Dist£~ RaipuKCG) VERSUS RESPONDENT (1,) Fool Kumar Kewaf S/o Sri Rup NON—APPLICANT ‘ / Naih KewaJc, Aged about 52 i a ‘ APPELLANT KLAIMANT yealrs, Occupafion—= Driver, R/o ViHage, Kursipar Bhiiai, Tabsil & Disff— Durg (CG) (2) Sifa Ram Salm S/o Sri Mansha Ram [E Truck Owner— R/o ~ Dabrapara Bhilai, Thana — Bhilai, Tahsil & Disec— Durgma.) Limifed. Through: Divisianal Manager, Divisional OFFice No. 1, Kachahari Chowk, Jail; Road, Raipur (CG) MisceHaneous Apgeai under/sadionv‘l73 Motor Vehicle Act 1988 #/ Being aggrieveé b¥ H76 )udgcmenf ané awaré yasseé by (3) lThe Orienfal Insurance Company first Ad§ifional MoLor Acciéegf Claims Tribunal agQDisfrid Ju e iuri cli 5e no.13‘772oo2 ta 11.08.2003 in flae casc o€5a n’c Kumar vcrsus Fool Kumar g ofliors. L49 W HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT éILASPUR DiVlSiGN BENCH: HON’BLE MR. I.M.QUDDUSI & HON’BLE MR.NAWAL KISHGRE AGARWAL JJ. M.A.No.4o1/2am ' M, \Present: . W \ Mr. A.L. Singraui, Advocate for the appellant. ' ' None for respondent No.1 & 2 though served. Mr. Ajay-‘Mlshra, Advocate for respondent No.3. JudgmentlOrall “ (9‘ septemher,2o10) LM. Qudausi! J; " 1.3Heard. 2. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has been preferred by‘the appellant-claimant against the award dated 11.08.2003 passed by the learned 15"Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur (CG) (for short ‘the claims tribunal‘) in Claim Case No.137l2002 dismissing therclaim petition of the appellant herein. 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the appellant/claimant has filed a claim petition before the claims tribunal seeking compensation to the tune of Rs.7,00,‘000l- on the ground that on 16.5.2002 the appellant was traveling in the vehicle bearing registration number CGOY-ZB-0445 as labourer (3133i). The said vehicle turned turtle on account rash and negligentdriving by. respondent No.1 as a result the appellant sustained grievous injuries over his person and due to said injuries he is not able to do any work. . 4'. The claims tribunal. after hearing the parties in the matter and appreciating the evidence brought on record by the parties in the support of their cases, has dismissed the, claim petition on the ground that the appellant-claimant has failed to establish that on the date of incident he was traveling in the vehicle in question. 5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the‘ impugned award as also the record of the claims tribunal. Angeliant Sant Kumar (C!aimant) Resgondents Fool Kumar Kewat & (Non-Applicant) & w“: 6. From the record} it is apparent that the appellant has not produced any medical biH or injury report to show that he has for the injuries sustained by him in the undergone the treatment accident dated 16.5.2002. Further, the name of the .aqppeiiant does not find place in the iist of injured persons fiied along with the charge sheet. 7. in View of the above, we are of the opinion that the claims tribunal has not committed any illegality or impropriety in passing the impugned award and the appeal filed by the y } appellant deserves to he dismissed and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- _ No‘ofder as to costL¢ ‘ ‘ ‘ si\ .3. i ‘ Sd/_ .7 i ‘ 1 ‘N. K. Agarwal t ’ Roshanl- l ItMQudduqsi i ii Judge V Judge