3TI^T ^T f<vlJch TT^ ^[^\ 9b+ilch 3:wT "4N|^<M, ^TH'y'KS, R|(y')iy^< •ffm^r ww^ ...."^"I^...C.....Q).^------^ 200 ^ aniOT ^rcE (^f^^r) '^ITW^f^T 3?T^T kPPELLANT: NON-APPLiCANT 4 & 5 (Father & Mother) RESPONDENTS: CLAiMANTS DRLVER; OWNER: INSURER: -V 'cFFtfeFfrT^W^ ^'f^st' iPt^K '^T ^IRR a??T^r 4- 2. rsus- 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Anjani Kumar, S/o Ramadhin, Aged about 55 years. Mohari Bai, W/o Anjani Kumar, Aged about 50 years, Rfo Village Dubchhola, P.S. Khadgawa, Distt. - Korea (CG) Smt. Rajeshwari, Widow Late Gopai Singh, Aged about 25 years, R/o B-Type, Godripara, Chirmiri, Distt. Korea (C.G.) Krishna, S/o Late Goptal Singh, A^ed about 2 month Through: Natural Guardian, Mother Rajeshwari, Widow Late Gopal Singh, R/o B-Type, Godripara, Chirmjri, District - Korea (C.G.) Ajij Mohammad, S/o Najir Mohammad, R/o Chhoti Bazar, Chirmiri, Tahsil Manendragarh, District Korea (C.G.) fT'PPsr Truck Driver) Sajan Kumar Patodiya, C/o Biiaspur Poie Careers Pvt. Ltd., Jet Hostei Sonwani Colliery Manendragarh, District Korea (C.G.) (Vehicle Owner) Bajaj Alliance General Insurance Company Limited Zee Plaza, Airport Road, Yar XlflC—78 • TS^ ^WW^, ^xfty^lC, fsl^iy^ W^<yi\ sb^lcb •^ 200 3^T^T ^T lqrii^ TT^TT 3n^T 5b^l<=h T ani^ Ti^^ (^csl^^r) '^TTW^f^T ^H^T Bada, Pune, Pin 411006, Through: Branch Manager, Maikmet Building 10 B. O.C. Ganguli ,Sourbi Kolkatta 700020 (West Bengal) (Miscellaneous Appeal und^r Section 1 73 of the Motor Vehicle Act) Djvi^lorLBencb: - Hon'ble Shri L.C. Bhadoo & Hon'ble Shri Sunil Kumar Sinha, JJ- 1 T-8-2007:- Shri Rahul IVlishra, coun; Oral order dictated on D< L.C. BHADOO. J. The appellants who ar^ Singh have preferred this app^al aggrieved by the award datecf Motor Accidents Claims Triil No.37/2007 whereby learned Smt. Rajeshewari, widow of Gcjpal months o!d son of Gopal Singl^ been passed in their favour. T| the appellants herein were not • In the said claim petlti( respondents No.4 & 5 by the| Tribunal in para-10 of the aw; cross-examination, Mohari Ba| ^FPlfeFft^T 'RTR^if ^fa^l iFai^K ^ 3ff?F[ 371^1 el for the appellants. f/S. mother and father of deceased Gopal under Section 173 of the MV Act, being 28-4-2007 passed by the 1st Additionai ibunal, Manendragarh, in daim case 'ribuna! a!!owed the claim petition filed by Singh (since deceased>and Krishna, 2 & clajm to the tune of Rs.15,43,000/- has ic Tribunal has arrived at a conclusion that lependent on deceased Gopal Singh. m, the appellants herein were joined as claimants, widow of the deceased. The srd has reached to the conclusion that in (appellant No.2 herein) has stated that .^t^t.?-^/i.;^,^^ti?l@i;,Ml^iil,li!iilg|gS Mm ^M^S^ XI-flC—78 <$w| ^1^104, y>TO'(r)116, f^j^iy^- _^T^r^Tfs^ cT^T ^HG^T^TTJ^EI' KT- ^ ^y-- Barve ^Hdl sh^Jck ^OT x^w (^f^^sr) ^, 200 ^^TWRf^T 3TT^r *l<if<n4i ^i^^f ^ fest 'tf^^TT ^^tRm^n^r with his mother. Gopal Singh was her son. c?on je>f Gopdl SJiiyIi They never brought wife of the c(eceased to their place nor she went to her daughter-in-law's place. She ^ (ivelihood on their own. They ^ also they are earning their livc ilong with her husband was earning their 'ere never dependent on their son. Today lihood in the same manner. Thereby the Tribunal reached to the corlclusion that from the evidence of the appellants herein, 11 is establi^hed that they were not dependent on the earning of Gopal Singh. During the course of ar^uments, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the appellants herein have thejr own land and they are earning livelihood through agrjcultura! income. Apart form that, he also submitted that there are alreadl? 3 other sons of the appeltants herein. The appe!lants herejn l^ave failed to adduce any cogent and legal evidence to establish that t|iey were dependent on the eaming of deceased Gopal Singh. Moi cSaiming that they were de? Therefore, finding of the Tril ^over, they never filed any claim petition endent on the earning of Gopal Singh. >unal that the appellants herein were not dependent on the eaming of C^opal Singh js not perverse. We do not find any ground to interfere with t^ devoid of merit, js liable to be| admission stage itself. Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge e finding of the Tribunal. The appea! being dismissed and it js hereby.dismissed at the t. Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge ^1 ISK