HIGHCQURTOFCHHATTiSGARHATBIt.ASRUR SinaieBerich : Hon'bieShriDiiioRaosahebDeshmukhuJ, MisGeiianeous AopeaKC ) N0.27 of 2008 GTaimants ^: 1.Smt.AnjanaPradhan,agedabout41 years.SVidowofLateSukdeoPradhaij, Qecypation Hqusewife; 2. Ku. Anita Pradhan, aged about 19 years;' -:' , : •:: ; - :.: . , . ::; 3.; Ku. Babita Pradhah, aged about 14 yeare;::-' . • ;,' ^', ; i. :.;' V-:1: j 4. Ku. Kavita Pradhan, agsd abput 11 r years;'' '1,1; •.••:,,, •;.~;:.^ 5. Tushant Pradhan, aged about^ years; The appeilant No.3 to 5 are minors through their naturai guardian and mother Smt. Ahjana Pradhan and Resident of Shaktinagar, District Raipur .'•(G.G.);. ." ::";.:: '•• :' versus Rivella IVIaleram, aaed about 23 vsars. Son^ or Rivella Narsimha, Occupation Truck Driver, Resideht 6f' Ihrough Lalchand S/o Rsshumai, . LiG-2, Indrawatl CQlpny, Post ;and Distnet •Raipur^.G.)' •'.-'.'^ ^': . •! 11;, '1 •' :: Ws. Saiteja Botewells, Owner of Vehjcle.through A. Swami Redcly.Son of Veera Recldy, Resident of fhFbugh Lalchand S/o Peshumal;,, LIG-2, Sndrawati Golony, Post and Distriet Raipur(C.G.) . .^, : . : : The QrienN insuranc;& Gpmpany Limited, through Diyisional Qffice No.1, Kachahari Chowk, District Raipur (C.G.)' .:';, ~^/. ••--.•'^ Memorandum of aooeai underSeetiQn 173(2) ofthe Motor Vehicles jSst fl Present : Shri MaiayKurnarBhadyri.counselfortheapRellants. Shri Sudhir Agrawal, counsel for the respondent ;T^6^insu^nce;cpmpany.:.::''',^ ,::,:':'': ^::i:'^^ ©RiM-QREiER s< on 15"'January, 20085 •Y Heard< . Y ^%~ :^'. •y ".V •' •-V ••'y^. :^N - i\- •2-- (2) Being aggrieved by the impugned award dated 27-09-2007 passed by the Seventh Additiona] Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Raipur (henceforth 'the M.A.C.T.') in Claim Case No.45/2006, whereby a sum of Rs.5,17,000/- has been awarded towards compehsation, the appellants/claimants have preferred this appeal.for enhancement 6f the compensation. (3) During the course of arguments, a setttement was arriyed at whereunder theinsurance companyagreed to pay a sum of Rs.7,000/- in addition to the compensation already awarded by the M.A.C.T. by deppsiting the same withina period of 30 days frem today;. (4) Shri Maiay Kumar Bhaduri, learned counse! Tor the appellants/claimants agrees to the setttement. (5) Shri Sudhir Agrawal, tearned counsel for respondent No.3/insurance company submitted that the amount of compensatisn awarded by the MACT has been.deposited by the insurance company before theMACT. (6) !n view of the. settlement arrived at, the award passed by ths .M.A.C.T. is modified and a.n additionalsum of Rs.7,000/- over and above . the sum already awarded by the M.A.C.T. is awarded as compensation to the appeliants/ciaimants. The respondent No.S/insyrarice company shail deposit an additiona! sum of Rs.7,000/- Withthe.M.A.C.T. within. a period of 30 days from today. (7) 'With the aforesaid direction, this misceitaneous appea! stands disposedof. . OaipRa0 ~SSF sahebDesbm» Judge