\ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORANI: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J Appellants Claimants Respondents Non-applicants Misc. Appeal (Cl No. 455 of 2010 1 Nand Kumar Patel, age - 46 years, s/o Late. Motilal Patel 2 Smt Tejmoti, age 43 years, w/o Shri Nand Kumar Patel 3 Smt Himadri @ Fulwanti Patel, age 22 years, w/o late Hemchand Patel 4 Krishna Patel, age 02 years,s/o late Hemchand Patel The appellant No.4 being minor represented by appellant No.03 mother All the above are r/o Patsendri, Tahsil . Saraipali, PS Saraipali, Distt Mahasamund (CG) VERSUS 1 Shiv Kumar Sahu, Age 32 years, s/o Shri Dukhuram Sahu, r/o Village - Riwa Lakholi, PS & Tahsil Aarang, Distt Raipur (CG) through Cheema Local Carrier, Telibandha, Raipur Tahsil & Distt Raipur (CG) (Driver of Dumper Truck CG 04 J 9758) 2 Suresh Kumar Sahu, age 35 years, s/o Shri Ramji Sahu, R/o through Cheema Local Carrier, Telibandha, Raipur Tahsil & Distt Raipur (CG) (Owner of Dumper Truck CG 04 J 9758) 3 The New India Insurance Com Ltd., s^: ;:"s-1'^^'^^"^f^T^ ri> 'ASnn^iisiSffl.Si iiif TtftMljWin^flrffW^i^ a,i.^- 2 MAC.No. 455 of 2010 Through Branch Manager/Divisional Office at Madina Building, Kachhari Chowk, Raipur Tahsil & Distt Raipur (CG) (Insurance Company of Dumper Truck CG 04 J 9758) IVIiscellaneous Appeal under Section 1 73 of Motor Vehicles Act Present : Shri JA Lohani, counsel for the appellants. Shri Sudhir Agrawal and Shri P Dutta, counsel for respondent No.3. ORDER >th (19ln0ctober,2011) The following order of the Couri: was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. Shri Sudhir Agrawal and Shri P Dutta, learned counsel for respondent No.3 submitted that the Tribunal has erred in holding that the Driver of the offending vehicle Dumper alone was wholly responsible for the accident, whereas, in fact it is a case of contributory negligence as deceased Hemchand Patel, who was driving the other vehicle Tata-Sumo also equally contributed to the accident. Learned counsel further submitted that the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, therefore, be reduced by 50%. 2) Shri JA Lohani, learned counsel for the appellants, in view of the above submissions of learned counsel for the Insurance Company, seeks permission to withdraw the appeal filed by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation r-.\ jrs"*' I.A.C.No. 455 of 2010 awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mahasamund, vide award dated 15.01.2010, passed in Claim Case No.73/2009. 3) Permission granted. 4) The appeal, therefore, is dismissed as withdrawn. 5) Shri Sudhir Ag.cawal and Shri P. Dutta, learned counsel for respondent No.3 the New India Insurance Company Limited, in view of the fact that the appeal has been dismissed as withdrawn, seek permission to withdraw the cross-objections filed on behalf of respondent No.3 the New India Insurance Company Limited. 6) Permission granted. 7) The cross-objections filed on behalf of respondent No.3 the New India Insurance Company Limited, therefore, are dismissed as withdrawn. Certified copy of the order as per rules. Sd/- ChiefJustice padma Sd/- R-N.Chandrafc Judge