—78 'TST r<ii^i<n^, ^tl1-(-|<|^, [c<cr)|<H^< *llH<tl »»*iicn ^ 200 ^TT^T TT=W (7icrf3^T) '371^T ^T f<'||ch '<TSTl ^TT^T stiHicb ^nw^f^^n^T HIGH COURT OF d PBTITIONERS: ^PLICANTS/ REVIBWNQRS Chandl Mahkol Statiorl f<n41i *ii+i<yil* ^' <fe^ ^fsi^K '^'3tfTO3T^T HHATTISGARH AT BIL^PUR WRIT PETITIGtN (Cl 227 N0. 3162/2008 Jitendi|a Kiixnar Yadav, son of Shri Phool Yadav, aged about 30 yeai's, Caste ^l, residence of viUage Bursa, Police ChIiattJLSgarh Vmay aged ^ Distric Owaeri Resoondeats No2&-AppIieas&ts 1. 2. Kunkuri, District Jashpur, Kumar Gupta, son of Late K.P. Gupta, bout 50 years, residence of Tapkara, Jashpur, Chhattisgarh (Registered of passenge.rs Biis No. CG 14 A/2012) Versus Kamesjhwar Ram, son of Sahendax* Ram, aged about p8 years, caste Ratiya Ravi $haakar Ram, son of Shri Kaaieshwar Ram, ^ 3. Ku. U| 4. Kii. iged about 17 years rmila Bai, daughter of Shri Kameshwar Ram, ^ged about 15 years arita Bai, Shri Kameshwar Ram, aged about |13 years 5. Shiv ^haakai' Raax, Shn Kaoieshwar Ram, aged about|5 years. AU be|c?ngs to caste Raitiya, AU resident ofvUlage Chap^toli, PoUce Station Jashpur, Tahsil Jashp|tir Nagar, Distdct Jashpur, Chhatdsgarh. AU £3|imors thi'ough legal guardiaa fatlier Kaiae^ 6. The Divisii shwar Rain Oriental Insurance Company Lunited, >nal Office near High Ck^urt Bilaspzu' (CG), Preseijit Address Opposite Rajeev Plaza, Bilas^ur, Chliattisgarh WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTlCLE 227 OF THB CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AL ORDBR 26-06-S»Q8 —78 ^i^T^rf^NT n$ff ^TT^nr ^rybF ~s^ T<ii^i(n'4,y>ti1<-i<i<o, fs|<yii'H^< *lll<rll »»*lich -^200 ^T^T ICWF (^I^^r) ^CTW^f^T^n^T 2- ttll Tnbufaal, DI&ireadra Mishra. J. Mr, C,J,K. Rao, counsell Heard, By this petition uncler A| petitioiiers have mipugnecl Motor Accident Clainis fhe petitioners under Order ^ order passed m. Claini Case N< Review petition was fil^ driving liceiice of the vehicle (L^r\7), motorcycle gross vehicle (HGV) w.e.f. Tribunal exonerated msiirmid award 011 fhe ground fh.at p| heavy passenger vehicle aii^ compensation uuder fhe awaijd After gouig fhrotigh the.| XLVII, Rule 1 read wiUi Sectit impugiied order passed by aai of the opmion fhat the| petitioners on the ground m^ii fb.e ouly remedy available to appeal uuder Section 173 oftpi |for ftie petitioner, petitiotier wiUi 30|th <=hi^?<n<><1<i ^ITq^ff ^ ft^ <Fsi^i< ^3tRTH3^[ jrticle 227 ofthe Constitution oflndia, fhe ti4e orcler of Annexurc P-1, passed by fhe butial, Jashpur, whereby flie application of }LVII, Rule 1 of the CPC for reviewmg the ^,2/2007, has been rejected. \d by the petitioners ou the ground fliat No,l was for drivuig of Ught motor gear w.e.f 30dl September 2005, heavy Septeniber 2005. However, the Claims compmiy from Uability of the satisfymg ^titioner No,l was uot havuig ticeuce for helcl tiie petitioners tiable for payiiig appMcation of the petitioners under Order m 151 ofthe CPC (Amiexure P-4) and flie le^med Clanas Tribunal in. review petition, I appUcation for review prefeiTed by fhe iitiQiied therein was not iiiamtamable and fhe petitionei^ was to file HiisceUaiieoiis ftjhe Motor Veliicle Act, 1988. ^^'"%. ^^-^ %^ \ [G—78 'To? "MI^Krl^, ^lll-i-i^Ko, F®Krll<-llj,< H1*1<tl ^»MT^» ^ 200 3TI^T TT^F (lic<^<^) ^TT^T ^I f^ThF ^T^T 3rT[^T PFRW <(•, ^ s In that view of the unpugued order by which his also not niamtamable, The petition is accordia; BJiatter, the mstant petition against the ^pplicatioa for review has beeii rejected is F<n€ii'i ^i^ioil ^ fe%t <Fn^$i< ^^tRww^T ;ly disuiissed. Sd/- DhirendraMishra Judge