'< IN THE mGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR SingFe Bench C..R.N3: ^ 2)03 APPELLANTS 1. Smt. Kal}®riDevi, Wd/o Late GtytedNrar Iteidey, s^sdsbout 42 yrara, ,.2. ^. ^^^ <^y ./' ^/' ^ Dilip KmmrPaadey, S/o Lste GiyteshwarPasidey, ^pd about 23 yfflrs, 3. Ashok Kunmr Ftodey, S/o Late Guptraihwar Piaadey, %ed atout 20 years, /4. Vm.odKwcer Pandey. S/o Qiyteshwar Randey, ayd atooutlSyeais, ^; I^femta Kunsn, D'o Late Oiiyteshwar Ptadey, %ed six>ut llyears,Mna'tD tfaroi.i^i natUTEi ^iardian molher Smt. Kalyari Ftodey, Wd/o Late Gupteshwar fandey AU R/o Bariki Mceag-a, Basti Nb. 2, TA. -Kfl^ioia, Distt- Korba(C.G.). VERSUS RESrciNDENT .-/ tional Insuranoe Conpany Ltd-Throu^i 1fae Branch Q\IL REVISIONUNrER SECHON 115 OF THE C.P.C. .,^:ss'%:i /'^'Sf^ %s:S^S&, l^ '-^^^^^ !\K."^ ssSlt y-e'^ :>a-Hc—78 sy^r -w W^ '. ---S^! WiN; + '^qCT^T, ^•rtl'M-'itf, M'ni'ay o • ^ ^D:.JA^I 3 n^T'q'R? (ipt^sf^q Sipiferah'fliwff'?'Ss'si Tl^R Shri SuniS Sahu, counsei |for the appiicants. Heard on admission. The instant revision is d 10-2002 passed in Claim Cas. irected against ihe order dated 09- ? No. 134/2002 by Additional Motor Accident Clalms Tribunal, Kort^ (for short "the Tribunai") whereby and whereunder an applicatioji filed by the Insurance Company under Order 7 Ruie 11of the P.P.C. was aliowed and the claim petition preferred by the applicafits was dismissed. Brief facts of the case ar^ Shat in a motor accident, the owner of the offending vehicle C.q.-l2/9136 was died. The legai representatives of the owner/fnsured fited claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vejiicles Act, claiming compensatlon against the Insurance Compjany. The Insurance Company preferred an appiication under Cprder 7 Rule 11 ofthe C.P.C. on the jround that the owner not bein^ a third party, the claim petition flied by the legal representatives ofj the owner is not maintainable nor the risk was covered in thls reg^rd. Learned Tribunai on artpreciation of material placed on record and in view of the adm|tted position that no premium has + ,"-% •^i^R^ f. -SsS-h £:y ^SHC-78 a^n«iT^!lN? i8)T31T^IWt»ra' .1 ——._KUL ^"sa' -^T3TOTq, 8)xi1'y<is, (2-. <?. N0. / S-S gn^?i'<ra^ (1l?f3^r) 3 L wfe^:''w??ff'^' "TsiRra been taken covering the risk oflowner and also the owner is not a third party, allowed the applica{i()n and dismissed the claim petition. Having heard learned colinsei for the applicants and having perused the record, In view of |the settted position of !aw that the policy of insurance insured's th^ liabilify of the insured arising out of the said accident and not the |nsured unless extra premium has been paid. Admittedly, RO ^xtra premium has been paid for covering the risk of the owner ahd, therefore, no idegality has been committed bythe leamed Triburlal. Therefore, the revision jdeserves to be and is herebv dismissed. No order asto costs.1 /f/i-. _ Sd/- N.K. Agrawal Judge - -- -t-&t_l^ ^_ -""J- ^yi. \ t i-_<—s-y