IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR fC.G.I M.A^No. %% /2006 APPELLANTS : CLAIMENTS RESPONDENTS: NON-APPLICANTS Jagdish Prasad Nishad, S/oMukund Prasad Nishad, Aged about 35 yrs., R/o Tatibandh Basti, Raipur, P.S. Amanaka, Tah. & Distt. Raipur (C.G.) Vs. Madhukar God, S/o Sri Devraj God, Aged about 35 yrs. R/o M.S. Service Station Telibandha, RaipurTah. & Distt. Raipur(C.G.) Smt. Rajender Kaur W/o Sukhdev Singh R/o M.S. Sen/ice Station Telibandha, Raipur Tah. & Distt. Raipur(C.G.) The Netional Insurance Co. Ltd. Branch OfficeNo.2, Nagpur By Divisional Manager, Divisional Office, Mobin Mahal, G.E. Road, Raipur(C.G.) Miscellaneous Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act. 1994 s^^ —78 S^l ^il [^•fi^i '(?®fT•^l^?l S?!:?Ni' *11«1CTI thHKft 3S[ •<||4||CT<1, ®Tll'M'16,fqyi'Hy ,.XA^-........2?.2^.......... .6 31I^TTR^T (1pf3^t TOIIW^fe 3(1^1 S.B. Hon'ble Shri Jystice N.K 30.10.2009 Shri Aditya Khare, Advcx] On due consideration application and the submissi<] satisfied that the counsel fi iM<ll<n<ftl MIHC'ff ^ fs^ll <^1-^1< ^rsrfOTsii^i Aaarwal ate Tor appellant. Heard on M(C)P No. 18:p1/06, application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. the grounds ralsed in the ns made by the eounsel, 1 am r appellant has succeeded in }r i(i fili explaining the delay caused i(i filing this appeal. Accordingly M(C)P No. 1821/06 is allowe^l and delay caused in filing the appeal is hereby condoned. Heardon admission. This is claimants appeal] 26.11.2005, pass«j by the } directed against the award dated <lllth Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur (for s|iort 'Tribunal'), in claim case No. 07/04, whereby and whereurlder the application filed by the appellant under Section166 (i Shri Khare, learned coii could not point out any iltegs Tribunal. f the MV Act, was dismissed on the ground that the appellar|t/claimant did not examine any witnesses to prove the content^ of application. nsel appearing for the appellant Uty in the award passed by the .1 [JB:IPJ,.-..- ^ C—78 sn^iw k-n^ WI SII^T »li'» t^ Sahu 'T-f -<i]*tia<)|®'dlfl'i'»iItsii-fly *n*iwi tb*ii«»> W^200 sn^i 1TiR) ¥<<nw^ifts 3ii^i 'hllfct'A'l W^f ^ fS^t <pi]t<;l< 'traffinsn^i It is tr'rte law that in the ^bsence ofevidence it cannot be said ttiat what has been sta|ed in the application or in the documents produced before tt|ie Tribunal is true. Documents produced without examining th^m cannot be read as evidence in the case, and therefore, the deserves to be and is hereby order asto costs. ribunal has not committed any illegality in passlng the impug|ned award. No other grounds have been raised by the appell^nt. In the result, the app^al being devoid of substance ^lismissed at motion stage. No SdA N.K. Agrawai Judge ^