(gg §!BH IN THE HON'BLE HIGH, COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W4???) 52 $3 ‘sX :- MANAGER, THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE APPELLANT COMPANY LIMITED, NEAR TO ADARSH BAL MANDIR, DHAMTARI, TAHSIL & DISTRICT.- DHAMTARI (C.G.) Vrs. RESPONDENTS/CLAIMANTS:— 1. PUNIA BAI W/O ANAND RAM SAHU AGE 52 YRS 2.— ANAND RAM S/O PYARI RAM AGE 55 YRS. BOTH RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PURUR, THANA & TAHSIL - GURUR, DISTT.— DURG C.G. RESPONDENTS/NON-APPLICANTS:- 3. KAILASH KUMAR SAHU S/O HEMU RAM SAHU AGE 26 YRS., RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PURUR, THANA & TAHSIL - GURUR, DISTT.— DURG C.G. 4. HEMU RAM SAHU S/O RAMPRASAD SAHU AGE 50 YRS., RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PURUR, THANA & TAHSIL - GURUR, DISTT.- DURG C.G. , WRIT PETITION UNDER SECTION 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ¥ E r ‘H n HIGH CGURT 6F CHHAT'HSGARH AT BILASPUR Sirigie Benth: Hm’ble Shli Justice Prasham Kumar Mis hra Wfit Petition (227} N0. 51 73 I 2008 Shri Sua‘hir Agrawa‘, :wnsel far ihe petitioner. WRIT PETiTiON UNDER ARTICLE 22? OF THE CONSIITUTIO£ OF iNDm CRAL ORDER (09.1 1 .201 6) Heard. (2) The petithner I insurance Company nas caited in question inn 5egality anti validity éf the impugned award pa5sed by the Addrtionai Mater Accidént Ciaims Tnbunal awarding compenSation of Rs.5.3001— i0 the ciaimants. Laarneii counser far the petitinner wauld submit that the Maruti Van was pliedin breach of peticy wnd‘rtion and that the Ctaims Tribune! shoutd not have awarcted penat intereSt. (3) . {4) The teamed Claims Tribunat has recorded a finding in aara 11 of the imaugned award that the insurance Company haa faiieii to nreve that the attident tank niahe because more than nerrnisaibie number of persons were sitting in the vehiete. The present is not a caee where the insurance Cempany has beeh heid iiabie fer injuries caused to persons more in if” numbers than the persens permittea te eccupy the vehicie. I \ ~\ PETETIONER Manager, The Oriantai insurance Company Limited Versus RESPGNDENTS Fania Bai and athers. {5) Even omerwiSé the award E oniy for Rs. 5,300/-. The in5urance Campany must hava incurred expemes mom than the said armurit whiie preferring the irrStant writ petitiurr. (6) Err the matter of Surya &ev Rai Vs. Rem Chander Ref arid others reperted ih 26m (6} 3CC 675 the Hon'bie Supreme Court has raid dawn the principiee rhat the High Court in exercise of its iuriediction under Articie 227 of the Cehetitutien of trrdia shourd not interfere fer correchhg mere error of iaw anu that ihe exercise of power should be sparingiy made in rare cases where non-interrerence wouid occasion faiiure of justiee or the party applying for cannet be compensated except by intehering with the impugned erder. G} For the foregoing reasons, thie Court is not inelined to entertain this petition, which faiie and is hereby dismissed . ' sak— Prashant Kumar Mishra i Judge