^4- IN THE mGH COURT OFJUDICATUREAT BDLASFUR (C.G.l 1 M.A.NO ^c/5'/2003 OivisionSenGfc APRELLANT CLAIMANT RESPONDENT OWNER ^^^^ t-^;^.^ a<^* ^' A»vt ^' Vimla Bai, W/o. Faneshwar Aged about 20 years, R/o. Badhiya Choha, P.S. Sitapur, District Sarguja (C.G.) VERSUS h F?Etkesh Kumar Singh, /L^ C S/o. Vijay Shankar Singh, aged about 25 years, R/o. Neharu Road Sittipara, Ambikapur, District Sarguja (C.G.) Claims before the Tribunal Awarded ainount Rs.10,98,000/- Rs.NU MISCELLANEOUS AFFEALU/S 1730FTHEMOTOR VEmCLEACT. 1988 •^ .t.-.J ^. <.i.i:liyifck,ijiiii; HIGH COURT OF GHHAmSGARH AT BILASPUR APPLICANT Claimant RESPONDENT M.A.NO. 845 of 2003 Vimla Bai Versus Rakesh Kumar Singh Owner APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT DB: Hon'ble Shri JusUce I.M. Quddusi & Hon'ble Shri Justice N. K. Agarwal. Present : Shri Sanjay Agrawal, Advocate for the appellant. Shri Dashrath Prajapati, Advocate for respondent. ORALORDER (Passed on 21st day of September, 2010) Per: I.M. Qtiddusl, J. 1. The instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant ^ainst the award dated 11 .07.2003, passed by the Add'rtional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Surajpur (for short the TrHiunal') in ctaim case No. 71/03, dismisstng the claim petttion of the elaimant at the initial stage. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, the appetlant (since deceased) while drivlngthe Jeep bearing registration No. CG-15-ZA-1243, lost his balance and met with an accident as a result of whteh he succumbed to the injuries sustained In the sajd accident. 3. The claimant i.e. unfortunate wklow of the deceased preferred an application before the Tribunal under Section 166 of the Motor Vehteles Act, claimingcompensation forthedeath of her husband in the said accident. t( n.1:ii Sahu 4. The Tribunal dlsmissed the claim petition preferred by the appellant. 5. It appears that, the Tribunal has not proceed with the matter and without framing any Issue dismissed the petttion at initial stage, but, arislng out of the same accident, in case of another claimant namely Budhiyari, who had filed a clalm petltion, which was reglstered as claim case No. 16/03 on 17.04.2003, was entertained and award was made to the tune of Rs. 1,77,000/- vide decteton dated 31.07.2004, therefore, we are of the opinion that the matter requires re-consideratlon by the Tribunal concerned. 6. Accordingty, the appeal is allowed in part. The order dated 11.07.2003 is set aside aml the matter is remttted back to the Trlbunal concerned, for decision afresh. 7. The Tribunal concemed shall provide an opportunity to both the parties to adduce further evMences, if any, and shall .decMe the matter afresh in accordancewith law. No order asto costs. Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- N.K. Agrawal Judge