^^b' l^\^ COURT OF AT : Hon'bSe Shri DISip Deshrpykh. J. ^o IjsceiJaneous Appeai (C.) No.1181 of 2007 Owner .Respoodents Clalmants Seeper Lodhi, S/o Shri iate Mayaram Lodhi, aged about 46 years, R/o Vlilage Puraina, Tahsil Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) versus 1. Pumshottam Ram Sahu, S/o Late indal Sahu, aged about 45 years 2. Smt. Parwati Sahu, W/o Purushottam Sahu< 40 years R/o Vlilage Sankra Poilce Station Kumhari, Tah. Dhamdah, Di'strict Durg (C.G.) (Claimants) 3. Komal SJngh, S/o Milan Singh, 2S years, R/o DauChoura Tahsil Khairagarh, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) (Driver) ynder 173 of theMotorVeh!c[e_s Act. 1988 Present: Shri Vishnu Koshta, counse! for the appellant. Shri A.K.Prasad, counsel for respondents No.1 and 2. None appears for respondent No.3. (Passed on thls 12th day of August; cn adrnission. (2) The Xlth Additionai IVIotor Accidents Claims Tribuna! (F.T.C.). Durg (henceforth 'the tribunai') in Clalm Case No.171/2006 vide award 22-09-2007 awarded compensation of Rs.2,17,000/-. The offending vehicie' Mini Bus No.CG08/B/5036 owned by the v' appelianV-owner \¥BSnpt Insured on the of accident. Respondents No.1 and 2/claimants have a Order 41 ^-2^- "> Ruie 22 of the Code of Civi! Procedure for enhancement of compensation. The sole ground by iearned counsei for.the •appellanyowner in this appeal is that the tribunal ought to have muJtipiJer of 15 in of 16. The 22 years. Respondents No.1 and 2/claimants were ofthe 45 and 40 years. In 14, the tribunal has given reasons for appiylng muitipller of 16, which, In the facts and circumstanpes of the case, cannot be fauitsd with. No other ground was urged by iearned counsei for the appelianVowner. !n thls vlew of the rnatter, there is no merit In this appeal. At the hearing of the appea!, Shri A.K.Prasad, iearned counsel for respondents No.1 and 2/c!aimants did not the cross appeal. (3) As a result, the mlsce!!aneous appea! as a!so the cross under Order 41 Rule 22 of the Code of Civii Procedure filed by respondents No.1 and 2/claimants stand dismissed. Stay granted on 16-10-2007 vacated. Shri Vishnu Koshta, iearned counsei for the appeijant/owner submifrted that the appellant/owner has aiready a sum of Rs.1,75,000/- before the tribunai in pursuance of the order dated 16-10-2007 by thls Court and shaii deposit the remasning compensation in the tribunal within t\ivo months from today. The prayer is not opposed. Ordered accordingiy. The amount deposited by the appelianVowner shaii be dlsbursed to respondents NoJ and 2/daimantsforthwith. Sd/- Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh Judge Gopal