1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 187 of 2022 Manager The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Ambikapur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant versus 1 - Lachhu Ram S/o Late Dukhu Ram Aged About 55 Years R/o Village Manora, Tahsil Manora, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Jeetmani Bai W/o Lachhu Ram Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Manora, Tahsil Manora, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh. 3 - Sonu Ram S/o Lachhu Ram Aged About 29 Years R/o Village Manora, Tahsil Manora, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh. 4 - Ali Jafar S/o Saukat Ali Aged About 28 Years Occupation Driver, R/o Village Kusmi, Police Station Kusmi, District Balrampur Chhattisgarh. 5 - Samaliya Prasad Saraf S/o Balmiki Prasad Saraf, Aged About 24 Years Owner Of Vehicle, R/o Village C/o Rajenra Sethiya, 43 Mesnet, Sector-1, Shankar Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Appellant : Ms. Swati Agrawal, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate For Respondent No. 4 : Md. Altamas Zaheer Ali, Advocate on behalf of Mr. J. K. Saxena, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment on Board 11/02/2026 1. The Insurance Company has preferred this appeal assailing the award passed by the learned Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Digitally signed by NADIM MOHLE 2 Jashpur passed in Claim Case No. 81 of 2019, whereby the learned Tribunal has granted compensation to the tune of Rs. 8,26,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum on account of death of Chotu Ram on 20.03.2019. 2. The facts, in brief, are that on 20.03.2019, at about 6.00 hrs, while Chotu Ram along with Shanti Bai were returning their home on a motorcycle, near village Baghima, the driver of the offending car bearing registration No. CG-04-HB-7771 by driving it rashly and negligently dashed against the bike, resultantly, both of them fell down and sustained grievous injuries. Shanti Bai died on the spot, whereas Chotu Ram succumbed to his injuries during the course of treatment on 01.04.2019. 3. The claimants, who are the parents and younger brother of the deceased, filed a claim case under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, wherein it was pleaded that at the time of accident, the age of the deceased was 24 years and he was earning Rs. 10,000/- per month. The driver, owner of the offending vehicle, and the Insurance Company filed their replies. The learned Tribunal framed issues, parties led evidence, and thereafter the award was passed. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant/Insurance Company would argue that the deceased - Chotu Ram sustained injuries as under :- 1. Lacerated wound present over frontal region above left eye directed vertically size about 3 x 1 cm; 2. Lacerated wound on the cheek below the left eye, directed vertically, size about 4 × 1 cm. 3. Lacerated wound over right leg (middle part), size about 2 × 2 cm, with active bleeding present and bony crepitation present. She would submit that there was no fatal injury and the deceased died on 01.04.2019. There was no nexus between the injuries sustained by the deceased and the cause of death. She would further submit that 3 the in ordinary course of nature injuries sustained by the claimant were not sufficient to cause death of a person. She would contend that the learned Tribunal committed an error of law while treating the claim petition as death case and granted compensation accordingly. She has placed reliance on the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Smt. Alka Shukla v. Life Insurance Corporation of India reported in 2019 Supreme (C) 486; and in the matters of The Oriental Insurance Company v. Smt. Kanti Bai and ors. passed in MAC/1042/2011, DT. 12.12.2011 & Raju Patel v. Gautam and ors. passed in MAC/648/2021, 22.01.2026. She would pray to set aside the award passed by the Tribunal. 5. On the other hand, counsel appearing for the respondents would submit that the award passed by the learned Tribunal is just and proper. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 7. In the matter of Smt. Alka Shukla (supra), it has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that in order to sustain claim under accident benefit cover, it must be established that assured has sustained a bodily injury which resulted solely and directly from accident. There must exist a proximate causal relationship between accident and bodily injury. 8. In the matter of Smt. Kanti Bhai (supra), the Division Bench of this Court has held that there should be evidence to connect the death of the injured with the injuries caused due to the accident. The postmortem was also not conducted therefore, the claimants are not entitled to receive loss of dependency on account of death of deceased. 9. In the present case, the deceased Chotu Ram met with an accident on 20.03.2019. He was taken to the hospital and was medically examined by the Medical Officer on the same date. The offending car was seized by the police on 01.04.2019. The driver of the offending vehicle was 4 arrested on 01.04.2019 as per Exhibit A-24. MLC report (Ex.A/10) would show that Chotu Ram, S/o. Lachhu Ram Bhagat sustained serious injuries over skull, including fracture of tibia and fibula of the right leg. The Medical Officer found the injuries grievous in nature. 10. The Insurance Company examined Satish Kumar, Administrative Officer, Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. who stated that he did not personally verified the accident. He stated that driving license of deceased was not produced. He further stated that the offending Indica car (CG 04 HB- 7771) was insured with third-party coverage. 11. AW-1 Lachhu Ram Bhagat, in his statement, deposed that Chotu Ram was his son and he was hit by the driver of the offending car. He was admitted in the hospital where he died. 12.It is true that postmortem of Chotu Ram was not conducted. Postmortem of the dead body is necessary where the cause of death is not apparent or clear. 13. In the present case, deceased met with an accident on 20.03.2019 & during course of treatment he died on 01.04.2019. The Insurance Company could not establish any other cause of death. Absence of postmortem report would not be fatal for claimants; thus, the learned Tribunal has rightly treated the case as death case on account of motor accident and granted compensation accordingly. 14. Taking into consideration the above discussed facts, I am not inclined to interfere with the award passed by the learned Tribunal. Accordingly, this appeal fails and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- Rakesh Mohan Pandey JUDGE Nadim