HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DlVlSlON BENCH CORAM: HON’BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON’BLE SHRI N.K. AGARWAL, J. Misc. Appeal No. 1409 of 2005 Appellants 1. Mus. Gouri Bai, aged about 45 Applicants years, widow of late Khedu Ram Yadav, 2. Jhamman Ram, aged about 22 years, son of late Khedu Ram. 3. Kheman, aged about, 18 years, son of late Khedu Ram, All are resident ,of village Kharsainga, post Kodapar, tah. Kurud, distt. Dhamtarl Chhattisgarh. VERSUS Respondents 1. Mukesh Kumar, aged about 25 years, son of Parasram Sahu. 2. Paresh Ram, aged about 53 years, son of Shri Puranik Lal, 3. Kunj Lal, aged about 65 years, son of Shri Dayaram Sahu, y 4. Tekchand, aged about 4O years, son of Shri Kunj Lal, 5. Jhamleshwar, aged about 35*years, son of Kunjlal, 6. Ghanshyam, aged about 37 years, son of Firangi, 2 MA. No. 1409 of 2005 (LC? > All are resident of Village Khairsaja, tah. Kurud, distt. Dhamtari C.G. 7. The New India Insurance Cbmpany A Limited, G.E. Road, Bhiiai, distt. Durg C.G. Aggeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act Present : Shri Ramkumar Tiwari, counsel for the appellants. Shri Sudhir Agrawal and Shri P. Dutta, counsel for respondent No.7. ORDER (18m November, 2011) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. Shri Sudhir Agrawal and Shri P. Dutta, learned counsel for respondent No.7, the New India Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Tractor-Trolley submitted that the ‘Tribunal has erred in directing the insurer of the Tractor-Trolley to pay compensation to the claimants as the deceased in fact was travelling in the Tractor-Trolley and the owner of the Tractor-Trolley did not pay any extra-premium for covering the risk of the persons travelling in the Tractor—Trolley. Learned counsel further submitted that as such, the, appellants/ claimants be directed to refund the amount of compensation paid by the Insurance Company under the impugned award. 2) Shri Ramkumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the appellants, in View of the above submissions, seeks permission to withdraw the appeal filed by the appellants/ claimants forg‘enhancement of the as 3 MA. No. 1409 of 2005 compensation awarded by the Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Dhamtari vide award dated 25.08.2005 passed in Claim Case No. 636/2004. 3) Permission granted. 4) The appeal, therefore, is dismissed as withdrawn. 5) Shri Sudhir Agrawal and Shri P. Dutta, learned counsel for respondent No.7 the New lndia Insurance Company Limited, in view ' of the fact that the appeal has been dismissed as withdrawn, seek permission to withdraw the cross-objections filed on behalf of respondent No.7. 6) Permission granted. 7) The cross—objections filed on behalf of respondent No.7, therefore, are also dismissed} as withdrawn. Certified copy of the order as per rules. A sw- N.K. AGARWAL Judge Sd/— 7 CHIEF JUSTICE pimm i in” l