Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(MP) 27763
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ACHAL KUMAR PALIWAL
ON THE 31st OF JANUARY, 2024
MISC. APPEAL No. 1457 of 2022
BETWEEN:-
LOKESH S/O BADRI PRASAD, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: LABOUR CASTE KAHAR R/O RANHAI
KALA POLICE STATION HARDA TEHSIL DISTRICT
HARDA (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANT
(BY SHRI BHUPENDRA KUMAR SHUKLA - ADVOCATE)
AND
1.
UMESH S/O SHRI JAGDISH NAGVER, AGED
ABOUT
29
YEARS, OCCUPATION:
VEHICLE
DRIVER AND OWEN CASTE KORKU R/O VILLAGE
BONDGAON
POLICE
STATION
KSHIPAWAD
TEHSIL KHIRKIYA DISTRICT HARDA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2.
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. JALEBI
CHOWK PANCHANA ROAD CHANDWA DISTRICT
KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
3.
RAMDULARI W/O LATE KISHORILAL, AGED
ABOUT 70 YEARS, R/O VILLAE RANHAI KALA P.S
HARDA TEHSIL AND DISTRICT HARDA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
4.
KU. SHITAL D/O LATE KAMAL, AGED ABOUT 14
YEARS, OCCUPATION: MINOR THROUGH HER
NATURAL
GUARDIAN
GRAND
MOTHER
RAMDULARI W/O LATE KISHORILAL R/O VILLAE
RANHAI KALA P.S HARDA TEHSIL AND DISTRICT
HARDA (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI KAMAL SINGH RAJPUT - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.1)
(SHRI HEMANT PATHAK - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.2)
This appeal coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
1
Signed by: POONAM
MANEKAR
Signing time: 2/2/2024
10:48:56 AM
Signature Not Verified
following:
Bhupendra Kumar Shukla,
ORDER
With consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally at motion stage.
This appeal has preferred by the appellant under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicle Act challenging the award dated 16.11.2021 passed in MACC No.136/2019 by Chairman, MACT, Harda whereby claim petition of appellant - Lokesh has been dismissed.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant was residing with deceased's family and was also working with deceased and he is nephew of deceased. In this connection, learned counsel for the appellant has referred to para No.27 of impugned judgment. On above grounds, it is urged that tribunal has wrongly found that appellant is not dependent on deceased.
Therefore, appeal filed by the appellant be allowed and appropriate compensation be awarded to the appellant.
3. Learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 & 2 submits that admittedly appellant is not dependent on deceased, therefore, tribunal has rightly dismissed his claim.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.
5. On the date of accident, appellant was aged approximately 28 years. It is also an admitted fact that appellant is nephew of deceased. Appellant has left behind his widow mother as well as minor daughter.
6. I have also perused the para Nos.20, 22, 27 of impugned award.
7. In view of above, in this Court's considered opinion, it cannot be said that appellant is dependent on deceased. Hence, tribunal has rightly dismissed the appeal. No interference is called for in the finding recorded by the tribunal.
8. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the appellant is hereby dismissed and disposed of accordingly.
(ACHAL KUMAR PALIWAL) JUDGE pnm Signature Not Verified Signed by: POONAM MANEKAR Signing time: 2/2/2024 10:48:56 AM
