^miMS- ih^w^,S awi»^- a ]N THE H3GH CQURT OFJUD3CATURE AT BJLASPURJCG^ MiscetianeousApt^al Mo. \^\ f2Ctt5 ><> ^ t<6^.-- APPELLANTS: / Nikunj vmi S/o S^inteha: Soni CLA1MANTS aged About 40 yeare, OccupaBon Ricteaw Drtver, Vjo Ttehm Nagar, re- KobvaSi, Raipur, Tah & Diafc - Raipur (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENT5 : ^l^ fappu CS' Bafdev Safiu S/o njnit Ram NON-^PPLIC^&F^^ ^ Sahu J^.ed atout 25 ^ears; R/o Viffage - Bramhapurt, Behfnd- Budheshwar Tempte, Raipur, Tah & Di'stt- Raapur (C.G.j ftintt Ram Sah«S/o Hwa Ram Sahss, Occupa&OB- Truck Ownet; R/o Btafr^apuri, Behind-Budbe&bwar Tempfe, Raiswf: Tah& Djstt-RaipurlCG-) ^^eMS^ t\>^.y'^/ L^-"- ^'^.•••" ...^"^-""^" ^y^ ^?p' Mtsceifareous Appeaf undff/secCon 173 OfTlie Motor Vehs'de Act 199^— &a"Q aaarie^ed ttre Xukement and award bv the Third" addiBonai Motor Accide(tt Cla'ims Tribts^. Ra'ptff »n C?a/n C3se No. 33/2003.' Ju(tefne»?t dated .12.2CsQ4,'in cax, of Wsfcun; Sonr rsus Pawu Sahu & othere. li ''- % ^l "'l S "y. "3:£ ,^ HI6H COURT OF CHHATTIS6ARH AT BIUSPUR DIVISION BENCH: HON'BLE MR. I.M.QUD&USI & HON'BLE MR. NAWAL KISHOR6 A6ARWAL. JJ ALA-J^o. 141/05 ApDellant Respondents Vs Nikunj Soni Pappu @ Baldev Sahu A another Mr. A.L. Singraul, Advocate for the appellant. None for the respondents. ORDER fOral) i+b (14tn December, 2010) I Quddusl. J: 1. Heard. The appellant/claimant has filed this appeal against the award dated 06.12.2004 passed jn Claim Case No.33/03 whereby the learned 3 Additional AAotor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur (C6) (for short 'the tribunal') has dismissed the claim petition of the appetlant/claimant. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant has filed a claim petition seeking compensation of Rs.9,75,000/- for the permanent disability sustained by him in an accident which has taken place near Kalawati Nursing l-lome,Shoilendra Nagar due to rash and negligent drivjng by driver of the motor cycle in which he was traveling as pillion rider. The claimant has also stated that due to his permanent disablement, he has sustained loas'of earning capacity as prior to incident he w.ns earning Rs.100/- per day by pulling rickshaw. The owner nnd the driver of the vehicle in question have filed their written statement and stated that accident has taken place due to negligence of the claimant himself. They have also E / f i. ^^* '%,-.2;£- sought dismissal of the claim case on the ground of dela laches. 5. The tribunal, on the basis of thepteadings of the parties, framed as many as seven issues and after hearing the parties in the matter decided all the issues against the ctaimant and consequently dismissed the claim petition of the claimnnt. 6. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the impugned award as also the record of the claims tribunal. 7, From perusal of the record, it is evident that the accident has taken place on 16.10.2000 and report of the accident was lodged in the police station on 19.2.2001 •j.e. after a lapse of more than four months and no satisfactory explanation has been offered by the claimant for this inordinate delay. Further, the permanent disablenient certificate has been issued to the appellant in the year 2004, whereas the accident is alleged to have been taken place on 16,10.2000. It is also to be noted that in the accident cases, the hospital concerned used to give intimation to the police station concerned about the accident, but in the present case no such intimation has been given by the hospital concerned. In view of the above, we are of the view that the tribunal has rightiy dismissed the claim petition of the appetlant. 8. In the resu.It, the appeal has no substance, the same deserves to be and is hereby dismissed, No orders as to cost. Sd/- IM.Quddusi Judae Sd/- N.K.Agar Judge Roshon/-