:B:.!t'!«];, ^i 'i':.. \ 'A -^/ 'y..,/ ^•y^ '*-;. y-^ ";{\ » \:0'^.l :l'l''.l\^ :!.: 7 ^ ,-•1 p^ ft C u inaieSencn : Hon'bie Shri Siiio Raossriieb Deshmukli. J. I.A.(C.}P.R.No.2337SO(a Respondents Smt. Jantri Bai, Wctfo. Late Bhuwan Lal Sahu, sQed about 40 ^ars • Lukeshwar, S/o. Late Bhuwan Lal Sahy, agedabout 17 years " . .,:, Sohan Lal, S/o, Late Bhuvten Lal Sahu, aged about 14 yeare, ; No. 2 and 3 minore, through natural guardian motherSmt. Jantri Bai,' Ail R/o Parrikhurd, Posi Bharregaan, P.S. Lalbag, District Rajnandgaon.(C.G.) 1. Shravan Kumar @ Chhotu, Kanhaiya Lal Gond, aged about26Yeare; R/o. Basuia, Post Basula, P-S. Gbuoaka, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ^ 2. Smt. Shankuntala Oiaubey, W/o. Dine^ Chaubey, R/o. Bajarar^pur, Naw^apn, Polioe Chauki Chikhali, Distriot Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 3. Branoh Manager, TheOriental Insurance, Company Limited, Kamthi Linei Rajnandgaon (C.G.) i 4. Deendayal, S/o. Katanath Sahu, aged aboLit 50 yeare, R/o. viilage Chhui^iadan, P.S. Lalbag, Tahsii and District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 5 The National Insurance Ccxnpany Limlted, Through : Branch Manager^, The National Insurance Company Limited, Branch Office Kamthi Line, Rajnandgaon (C.G.5 liscetianeous Aooeal under Section 173 ofthe MotorVehicles A<A. 19®. Present :- Shri A.vmash Ghand Sahu, counset for the appellants. ORAL ORDER (Passed on this t7sl day of October, Heard on l.A.No.1, whioh is an apptioation for oondonatton ofdelay of 354 days in filing the appeal. .A.,— -2- wistije(s (2) tn a case of death of one BhLiwantal, aged betv/een 55 to 60 years, inthe absence of any.reliable evidence as to income ofthe deceased, nnonthly iEicoms ofthe deceased taken at Rs.3,000/- and afterdeducthg pereonal expenses of the deceased, annyal dependenoy.wasassessed at Rs.24,OQQ/-, and thereafter, applying muttip.lier of 8, loss of dependencywas assessKl at Rs.1,92,000/-. In addition, Rs.2,00(y- was. awarded towards funeral acpenses, Rs.2,500/- towards loss pf estate and Rs.5,000/- towards loss of consortium. .Thus, total compensation of Rs.2,01,500/- was awarded. (3) The impugned award is dated 11-05-2007 In Claim Case No.108C004. The appeal was preferred after delay of 354 days on 29-07-2D08. , (4) It has been mentioned in the apptication that the appellant No.1 is an uneducated lady and reskled in a remote area of District Rajnandgaon and oame to know about the award in the month of July, 2007 but wsnt Nagpur for sarning her livelihood and retumed in the month of April, 2008 and met her eounsel, and thereafter, copy has been obtalned. However, this statement of the a^etlant No.l is not substantiated from ffie copy of the impugrred award which was applied for on 27-03-2008 and reoewed on 15-04-2008. It is also not in dispute that the appellant No.1 was represented by counsel before the Tribunal. Learned oounsel for the appellants has also not been able to danonstrate anyarguable point in this appea!. ^ (5) Thus, I am of the considered opinicai ftat no sufficient cause tor condonation of delay in filing this appea! is shcwn. As a result, the application (I.A.No.1) is dismissed. As a consequenoe thereof, the appeat-also stends dismissed as barred by limitation. __._— -— - Sdl- Dilip Rao' judge Tumane