1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 266 of 2024 1. Luv Kumar Kaushik S/o- Jawaharlal Kaushik Aged About 32 Years Resident Of Village- Chakrakund, Panchayat- Chorbhatti Kala, Post- Ganiyari, P.S.- Sakri, Dist.- Bilaspur, C.G. (A-1 And A-2 Are Owner And Driver Of Offending Vehicle Cg-10-As-1838 Resp.) 2. Lalit Kumar Kaushik S/o Jawaharlal Kaushik Aged About 30 Years Resident Of Village- Chakrakund, Panchayat- Chorbhatti Kala, Post- Ganiyari, P.S.- Sakri, Dist.- Bilaspur, C.G. (A-1 And A-2 Are Owner And Driver Of Offending Vehicle Cg-10-As-1838 Resp.) ... Appellant(s) versus 1. Fekni Bai Wd/o Late Shri Narendra Kumar Kaushik Aged About 40 Years Resident Of Village- Chakrakund, Panchayat- Chorbhatti Kala, Post- Ganiyari, P.S.- Sakri, Dist.- Bilaspur, C.G. (Sole Claimant) 2. Tata-Atg General Insurance Company Limited Fourth Floor, Gwalani Chamber Office T-8, Near Icici Bank, Vyapar Vihar, Tehsil And Dist.- Bilaspur, C.G. (Insurer Of Vehicle Cg-10-As-1839) ... Respondent(s) For Appellants : Mr. Pallav Mishra, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 07.11 .2025 1. Heard on I.A. No. 02/2024, an application seeking exemption from depositing the statutory deposit. 2. The appellants/owner and driver of the offending vehicle have filed this appeal against an award dated 29.11.2023 passed in Claim Case No. 658/2021 by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, whereby, the learned tribunal awarded compensation to the tune of Rs. 16,94,300/- in favour of the claimants with interest at the rate of 7% from the date of application. SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Digitally signed by SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Date: 2025.11.07 14:44:44 +0530 2 3. Learned counsel for the appellants would seek further time to deposit statutory deposit of Rs. 25,000/-, which is mandatory according to the provisions of Section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988. 4. Taking into consideration the fact that this appeal was filed in the year 2024 and till date the appellants have not deposited the mandatory deposit of Rs. 25,000/-, whereas, they were granted sufficient opportunity; therefore, I.A. No. 02/2024 is hereby rejected and this appeal also fails and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge $iddhant