^SSiiS^ SSRW^ HIGH COURT OF CHHAmSOARH AT BILASPUR DWISION BENCH CORAM; HON'BLB MR. T.P. SHARMA & HON'BLE MR. R. L. JHANWAR. JJ. APPBLLANTS CLAIMANTS RESPONDBNTS: M.A. ( Q N0. 511 OF 2009 1. 2. 3. Trilok Siagh Son of Sukhram, aged about 28 years; TUasan Sin.gh Son of Siikhram, aged about 26 years; Milap Siagh Son of Sukhram, aged about 24 years; AU Caste Kaawar an.d residents of Village Kaaaibahra, Police Station Pendra, DistdctBilaspur (C.G.). Chhaggu @ Chhaga Son of Lala Ram Kol, aged about 32 years, Resident of Bharrapara Pendra, TahsU Pendraroad, DistrictBilaspur(C.G.). Raju Lal Sahu Son of Jeevaa Lal Sahu, aged about years, Resident of Aamadand, PoUce Station Peadra, District Bilaspur (C.G.). Bajaj AUiaace General Insurance Company Liinited, Raipur, Distorict Raipur (C.G.), Shiv Mohaa Bhawaa, Vidhan Sabha Road, Paiidri, Raipur (C.G.). MBMO OF APPBAL UNDBR SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VBHICLB ACT, 1988. Present:- Shri Ashok Soni, Advocate for the appellants. Shri S.S. Rajput, Advocate for fhe respondent No, 3, VERSUS 1. 2. 3. ORAL-JUDGBMBNT (Passedon 15/07/2010) / The foUowuig iudRiaent of fhe Court was passed by T.P. Sharm.a, J:- 1. By this appeal appeUaats has challenged the legality aad propriety of the awai'd dated 4/ 12/2008 passed by Additional .© ./^^ 1.:'"" ''^Ja Motor Accident Claiois Tribunal, Pendraroad, Distdct BUaspur (in short 'fhe Tribunal') in Claim Case No. 28/2007 whereby leamed Tribunal whUe awardiag fhe claim of Rs. 50,000/ - as a no fault Uability dismissed the claim of the appeUaats on fhe ground that appeUaats are not dependent upon fhe deceased Sukhram. Shri Ashok Soni, Advocate for the appeUaats and Shri S.S, Rajput, Advocate for fhe respondent No. 3 are heard, Award impugned aad record of the Court below perused. The evidence adduced on behalf of tlie parties are sufficient for drawing aa iaference fhat appellaats are inajor sons of fhe deceased Sukhram are not dependent and werc self eaniing member fherefore learaed Tribuiial has rightiy denied fheir claira except fhe statoiitory Uability i,e. no faiilt IlabUity of Rs. 50,000/-. On miaute scrutiny of fhe evidence we are agreeiag wifh ffae fmding recorded by fhe learaed Tribunal relatmg to entiflement of the claim on account of deafh of Sukhrani. Leamed Tnbunal has not coinniitted aoy iUegality. Appeal is devoid of mLerits, Consequently, this appeal is Uable to be dismissed aad is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs, Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge Sd/- R.L. Jbanwar Judge fl ar