← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhREVP/50/2017dismissed

Gopeshwar v. Balram

2017-05-05Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sanjay Agrawal2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Review Petition No. 50 OF 2017 Gopeshwar S/o Badri Prasad Sahu, Aged About 50 Years R/o Murra (Tahsil), P.S. Abhanpur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1.

Balram S/o Firat Ram Sahu, Aged About 38 Years R/o Village Kodebode, P.O. Marad, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2.

Parmeshwari Bai W/o Balram Sahu, Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Kodebode, P.O. Marad, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3.

Sadashiv Sahu R/o Murra (Tahsil), P.S. Abhanpur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. A.D. Kuldeep, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Agrawal Order O n Board 05/05/2017 1.

Heard on I.A. No. 01, an application for condonation of delay of 259 days in filing this review petition.

2.

For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same (I.A. No. 01) is allowed and the delay of 259 days in filing review petition is hereby condoned. 3.

Also heard on admission.

4.

This is a review petition filed by the petitioner- Gopeshwar, the driver of the vehicle in question, questioning the order dated 17/06/2016 passed by this Court in Miscellaneous Appeal No. 853/2000. While setting aside the award

dated 24/01/2000 passed by the Seventh Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur in Claim Case No. 24/1998, this Court has allowed the appeal by awarding a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- with simple interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of its realization by considering all the evidence led by the parties. 5.

I have heard and considered the entire submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner. However, upon perusal of the entire record, I do not find any mistake apparent on the face of record, so as to interfere with the order impugned. Since the order impugned has been passed by considering the evidence of the parties in its proper manner, therefore, the same cannot be reviewed. Consequently, this review petition being devoid of merits, is hereby dismissed.

6.

There shall be no order as to costs.

Sd/- (Sanjay Agrawal) Judge Yogesh