HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Appellant/ Claimant Respondents Non applicant MACNo.1038 OF 2009 Satnam Singh age about 32 years, S/o Amar Singh, Caste Halba, R/o Maharajpur GE Road, Rajnandgaon (CG). Versus 1. Mo Mukeem Age about 30 years S/o Moinuddin Occupation Driver R/o Badnera Juni Basti District Amravati (MH). 2. Hardev Singh Goman S/o Joginder Singh R/o 109 Vinayak House, Sector 19, C Plot No. 2-A Washi New Mumbai, District Thane (MH). 3. The New India Insurance Co. Ltd. Through Zonal Manager, Zonal Office Bhilai, Distt. Durg (CG). APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT. (SB: Hon'ble Mr. N.K. Aaarwal. J.l Present : Shri Rakesh Thakur, Advocate for appellant. Shri Anand Gupta, Advocate for respondent No.3. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 5th day ofApril, 2010) 1. Heard on admission. 2. This is claimant's appeal against the. award dated 30.04.2009, passed by the Additional Motor Accident Glaims Tribunal (FTC), Rajnandgaon (for short 'Tribunal') in claim case No. 128/08 whereby and whereunder an amount of Rs. 55,000/- has been awarded to the claimant/appellant for loss of his she buffalo in the accident, holding the respondent No. 2 liable for payment of Rs. 49,000/- and the insyrance. company for remaining part of Rs. 6000/- alongwith interest @ Sperannum. The brief facts of the case are as under: i. On 05.09.2007, the appeltant's she buffalo met with an accident with vehicle No. CG 04/CU-5731 owned by the respondent No. 2, being driven by respondent No.1 rashly & negligently and insured by the respondent No. 3, as a result of which she buffalo died on the spot. Police Station Chichola registered a criminal case against the respondent No. 1 under Sections 279 of IPC and after investigation filed a challan against him. ii. The appeliant filed an application under Section 166 of MV Act against the respondents claiming Rs. 73,740/- as compensation for the death of said she buffalo in the said accident. ili. The Tribunal, on a close scrutiny of evidence ied, material placed, and submissions made by the parties, awarded Rs. 55,000/- as compensatlon to the appellant. However, since the policy of insurance covers the risk for damage to property only to the extent of 6000/-, therefore, the insurance company has been held liable to the extent of 6000/- and for remaining part of award, the owner of the vehicle was heid liable. Shri Rakesh Thakur, learned counsel appearing for the appellant although admitted the fact that the policy covers "4. .te & the risk on the head of damage to property to the extent of 6000/- only, but he would contend that since it is very difficult for the appellant to recover the amount from the owner of the vehicle, in the interest ofjustice, the insurance company may be directed to pay first to the appellant the aforesaid whole amount of compensation and then to recover the same from th6 owner of the vehicle. 1 have heard the counsel appearing for the parties and perused the order impugned. It is not in dispute that under Section 147 of MV Act, the insurance company is required to cover the riskof appellant for damaged property to the extent of 6000/- only. Undisputedly, the insurance company has not undertaken any risk over and above such statutory limit of Rs. 6000/-by taking any extra premium therefor. In such situation, the argument put forth by Shri Thakur is sense merit and such direction to the insurance company to pay first to the appellant the aforesaid whole amount of compensation and then to recover it from the owner, cannot be passed. In view of above, the appeal being devoid of substance is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. No order astocosts. N.K; Agra' Judge Sahu u -^ •- </ .f^