llriill' 'itl ^ INTHEHIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR (C.G.) Division Beneb' MISC.APPEALNo.:- rl-> 7 /2006. D.B. APPELLANT: - / ^'y_ [Claimant] RESPONDENT^:- ( Non-applicants ) ^--Kishan Kuinar Manikpuri, S/0 Shri Bodhandas Manikpuri, Aged: -42 Yrs. By caste Panika, R/0:-Nehru Nagar, Raipur, District:- Raipur (C.G.) rVERSUS: 1. (~. Chunnilal Agrawal, Age: - 26 Yrs, ^ S/0 Ramawtar Agrawal, By Caste Agrawal, Through Satyapal Bhagat, Kuwarram Nagar, Silaspur, . Tah. 8s Distt. Bilaspur C.G. At present R/0:- Bazarpara, Basana, P.S. Basana, Distt. Mahasamund,C.G. District: - Mahasamund (C.G.) [OwnerofTruckNo. C.G. 10 /ZD/ 0335] 2. The Divisional Manager, ^ <^. The New India Insurance Com. Ltd. n/^)ivision OfficeAt Madina Building, ^ Jail Road, Raipur, Distt. Raipur [C.G.] [InsuranceComofTruckNo. C.G. 10 /ZD/ 0335] A- The Divisional Manager, tf The Oriental India Insurance Com. Ltd. ^~~~Division Office At Chowla Complex, Beside U.T.I. Bank, Devendra Nagar, Raipur, Distt. Raipur [C.G.] ^ [InsuranceComofJeep No. C.G. 04 /ZA/ 2278] -: MEMO OF MISC.APPEAL UNDER_SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLE ACT. :- .% \^M » 'A* /•^ ?^ y^/ ^// J;? f <*•" /:^/ t\/' \^AF< HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPU! MISC. APPEAL No. 757/2006 APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR •VBHICLB ACT Kishan Kumar Manikpuri Chuniiilal Agrawal & others DIVmiON BENCH:- Hon. Shri Satish K. Agnjhotn and Hon. Shri N.K. Aeam-al. JJ PRESENT :- Shri J.A. Lohani, Advocate, for appellani Shri Dashrath Gupta, Advocate, for respondent No. 2. Shri Sudhtr Agrawal, Advocate, for the respondent No. 3. O R DER ( Passed on this 2nd day ofDecember, 2009) Pe»Satish K. Asiihotri. J Hcard. 1. The instaat appeal arises finin the order dated 23-3-2006, passed by the Ist Additional Motor Accident Clainis Tnbunal, Mahasamund in Claun Case No. 56/2004 rejecting the claim of the appeBaat on the gTound that the accident occurred due to driviag of fhe vehicle by the appeUant hiiaself in a rash aad uegligent laaniier. 2. The brieffacts, in autsheU, are that on 21-5-2004, while the appellaat Kishan Maiukpur was going froin Raipur to Pithaura along with passengers drivuig his awnjeep bearmg registration No. CG 04 AZ 2278, the driver of a Maruti Van bearia? registration No. CG 10 ZD 0335 conui^ froia opposite directiou, driviag thc saine in a rash aad negBgent maniier, \ dashed fhe jeep froan front, as a result of which, both the n vemcles got daaiaged aiid appellaiit aiid other passengers sustaiaed grievoiis iiyuries aad driver. of the Maruti Vaa aamely Aviaash Agrawal died. The appellaat preferred a claim petition under Section 166 ofthe Motor Vehicles Act. 3. We have exsuniaed all the pleadiags aad the docuiaents produced before the Clauns Tribunal aad we are of the coasidered opinion fhat fhe Tribuiial has rejected the claim of the appeUant wifhout consideriug the inatter froin atl aagle partictilariy fhe site iaspection. report, in which it is inentioned that fhere was head-on collision between tfae vetucles aad we are of fhe considered opiaion fhat this case requires reconsideration afresh. Ifit was a case ofhead-on coUision, as found ia ftie spot iaspectiou, it could not be held that there was no negligence on the part of fhe Maruti Vaa. Thus it requires exaitunati.on of ofher inaterials to come to a proper conclusiou. 4. Accordmgly, the uupugned order dated 23-3-2006 is set aside and fhe matter is remitted back to fhe Tribuaal for disposal afresh. The Tribunal is directed to consider and decide the claiiu case ofthe appeHaats afresh, in. accordaace with law, on its oiwn inerits, as earfy as possible, preferabty withln a period ofthree inonfhs from. the date ofreceipt ofa copy ofthis order. 5. The parties are permitted to adduce additional evidences, if so advised. 6. The observations, if any, inade hereiaabove, shaU not be construed as our opmion on merit. 7. The appeal is aUowed to the above extent. No order asto costs. 8. The Registry is directed to send back the papers, requisitioned from fhe Tribunal, forthwifh. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge Sd/- N.K. Agrav Judge