'i-i'"i" i:l -II -l HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR Division Bench Coram : Hon'ble Shri S.R.Nayak, C.J. Hon'ble Shri D.R. Deshmukh, «J. A. No. 225 OF 2006 Dhansay Gond, S/o Shri Gendram, aged about 40 years, R/o Viliage Katkona P.S. & Teshil - Lakhanour, Distt. Surguja C.G- yersus •^s ,-l' ?1. .1 ftA l\!i~TC^ •>^>»f5attitfit/Jii'i i i^ Purgntl Bai Wldow of Baigaram Gond, aged about 29 ysars, Occupation Housewife Sanshraj Singh S/o Late Baigaram, aged about 18 years, Occupation - 3, Ku. Hemiata Singh S/o Late Baigaram, Aged about 16 years, Occupation - Studant 4. Ku. Anjali Singh S/o Late Baigarm, aged about 14 years, Occupation - Student Respondent no. 3 and 4 being minor, through - natural guardian mother, (respondent no. 1 Puranti Bai) Ai! are resident of Villaae Mission Chauk Kedarpur, Ambikapur, P.S. & Tehsi! - Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja C.G. The Pratap Bus Ser/ice, Through - Bhuwan Bhaskar Slngh; O'd Bus Stand, A.mbikapur, P.S. S> Tehsil - Ambikapur, Distt-ourguja, C-.G. 6. The Orientai Insurance Company Limited, Through - Branch Manager, the Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Ambedkar Chauk, Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja C.G. Present : Mr. A.V. Sridhar, learned counsel for the appellant. (Passed on >nd The foilowing order of the Court was passed by h ^ ~a- In this appeai preferred by the owner of the motor vehicle invoived in the accident, the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that fhe MACT is not justified in recording the finding that the appeliant himseif was driving the motor vehicle at the time of the accident and in fact, at the time of the accident, the vehicle was being driven by the deceased himseif. Thls preclse question raised by the appellant before the MACT has been considered by the MACT In para 16 of the award. The MACT on permissible substantive piecss of evidence has recorded the factual finding that the appeltant was drunk and he himseif was drivinj the vahicle. The factua] finding so recorded by the MACT oannot be condemned for want of iega! evidence or perversity. The above factual flnding is based on the First Information Report - Ex.P/3, Merg intimation - Ex.P/4 and medica! report Ex.P/8, apart from the finding recorded by the criminal law Court when the appellant was prosecuted in a prosecution launched against the appellant for rash and negligent driving of the motor vehicte. No ground is made out for interference. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. No costs. Sd/- Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh Sd/- Chief Justtce Judge £7.^*"