Hon'ble JHAVERI, J.—By way of filing this appeal under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act against the judgment and award dated 10th December 2001 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Junagadh in MAC Petition No.46 of 1999 whereby the Tribunal has dismissed the claim petition on the ground of non-disclosure of number of the vehicle involved. 2. The short facts of the present case are that the on 10.6.1999 at about 12.00 hours the deceased was coming from the vadi to village Ranpura on the tractor owned by respondent No.1 and when there was a sharp turn the deceased had fallen down from the tractor and received injuries. He was shifted to H.J. Dave Hospital and on the next day while taking treatment he had died. The appellant who is the mother of the deceased Bhupendra had filed the claim petition being MAC Petition No.46 of 1999. The learned Member of the Tribunal vide impugned judgment and order has rejected the said claim petition. In paragraphs 5 and 6 of the said judgment it is stated as under:- "5. In this matter the deposition given by Dholiben is to the effect that the deceased Bhupendra was the younger son. He was travelling in Tractor No.GJ-9-8378 and trailer No.GJ-14-U 863 and they were coming to Ranpur from their farm. At that time, he fell down and thereafter he was shifted to Rajkot Hospital and on second day he died during the pendency of treatment. The cross-examination taken by the Insurance Company's advocate Shri dave in which it was stated that for this matter no complaint was registered and against the opponent No.1 no complaint or charge-sheet is produced in the matter. 6. The cross-examination taken by the Insurance Company's advocate Shri dave in which it was stated that for this matter no complaint was registered and against the opponent No.1 no complaint or charge-sheet is produced in the matter. 6. If we read the deposition and, after that, if we consider the statements, panchnama, from which the number of the vehicle cannot be found out and the station diary entry which is produced at exh.41 in which the number of the vehicle is not mentioned and except the version of the claimant no documents suggest that which vehicle is involved for the said accident, and for which the present application could not succeed and the claimant could not establish the case as to how the said vehicle is involved for the said accident and in this matter no chargesheet is produced, except the statements and the panchnama from which the number of the vehicle is not mentioned and the claimant could not establish the case and for which the present application cannot be entertained and hence it deserves to be dismissed, and so, I pass the following order." No case is made out to interfere with the findings of the Tribunal. The appeal is devoid of any merits. Hence, the same deserves to be dismissed and the same is dismissed accordingly.