•ii^li^S'^l-!: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR (C.G.) UjVlSJOEI S^nd M.A.No. WCOF~2007 ^eeladhar Takur S/o Ganesh Ram Takur Age about 25 Years, R/o Qr. No. -12 N, Street-ABD, Sector -6, Post - Civic Center, Bhilai, Distt. - Durg (C.G.) v/s Appellant / Claimant /' Respondents: (Driver) (,0wner) (Insurer) \^ \>-"£/- ^•\^^ ^•'<? .A-" J^ ^-' O'' C/^o^ ^'"'-i^ cy J< ^^ J^Rajendra Kumar s/o Bansilal /^ Age about 35 year, R/o A.darsh Nagar, Power House, Camp 1, Bhilai, Near Gopal Atta Chakki, Thana - Chhawani, Tah. & Distt. - Durg (C.G.) Tah. - Dhamdha, Distt. - Durg (C.G.) 2: Ajay Kumar Gupta S/o Swaminath Gupta, Age about 32 years R/o E W S 195 Vaisali Nagar, Bhilai Thana - Supela, Distt. - Durg (C.G.) ^.The Oriantal Insurance Co. Ltd. Regesterd & Main Office AshifAli Road, New Delhi 110002 c/o DivisoBal Manager The Oriantal Insurance Co. Ltd. Divisonai Office, MalviyaNagar, Durg (C.G.) 2. ^^ -r:irr ^, APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 of MOTOR 86i 's^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR APPELLANT Claimant RESPONDENTS M.A.(C) No.1464 of 2007 Leeladhar Thakur Versus Raiendra Kumar 8- Others (Driverl APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT DB: Hon'ble Shri Justice I.M. Quddusi & Hon'ble Shri Justice N. K. Agarwal. Present : Shri CKSahu, Advocatefortheappellant. Shri Avinash Chand Sahu,Advocate for respondent No. 1 &2. Shri Vipin Tiwari, Advocate for respondent No.3. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 28.10.2810) Per: I.M.Quddusi, J. 1. The instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the award dated 24.08.2007, passed by the IVth Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Durg (CG) (for short 'the Tribunal') in claim case No. 32/06, dismissing the ciaim petition of the claimant. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, on 03,09.05 while the appellant was going towards Bhilai^along with his friend by his Hero Honda motorcycle bearing registration No. CG-07/ZE-A-8922, the driver of Minidor ( Bajaj Delivery Van) bearing registratlon No. CG-07-C-0607 coming from opposite side, dashed the appellant's motorcycle as a result of which he sustained multiple injuries. '?- 6. 8. The claimant preferred an application before the Tribunal under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, ciaiming compensation for the injuries sustained in the said accident. The Tribunal dismissed the claim petitlon preferred by the claimant/appellant. We have perused the Lower Court Record and found that the FIR was lodged in which the number of Minidor (Bajaj Deiivery Van) has been mentioned as No. CG-07-C-0607. There is oral evidence as well as documentary evidence regarding treatment taken by the claimant on the date of accident. OPD slip of the Hospital shows the same as Medico-Legal case, but the Tribuna! has not taken in to consideration all th.ese facts and dismissed the c!aim petition. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, since the facts is that the accident had actually taken place and in the absence of material consideration by the Tribunal, we are of the opinion that the matter requires re-consideration by the Tribunal concerned. Accordingly, the appeal is atlowed in part. The order dated 24.08.2007 is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal concerned, for decision afresh. The clalm petition of the claimant shall be restored to its original number and same shall be decided afresh after providing an opportunity to both the parties to adduce further eyidences, if any, or to amend the pleadings. 9. Needless to mention that the Tribunal sha!l decide the ciaim petition as early as possible preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of LCR. The LCR shall be returned forthwith. 10. The parties who are present, shall appear before the Tribuna! concerned on 22.11.201 0. No order asto costs. Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- N.K. Agrawal Judge '"/ahu