1 2025:CGHC:44061 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 470 of 2022 Branch Manager, Cholamandalam M.S. General Insurance Company Limited, Address -2nd Floor, Simran Tower, In Front Of L.I.C. Office, Pendri, Raipur Chhattisgarh. (Insurer Of Vehicle Tractor No. C.G.08 P. 6912) ... Appellant versus 1 – Harishchandra, S/o. Late Shri Barelal, Aged About 45 Years, R/o. Village Piparkharkala, Police Station Bortalva, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. (Claimant) 2 - Smt. Sugabai, W/o. Shri Harishchandra, Aged About 40 Years, R/o. Village Piparkharkala, Police Station Bortalva, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. (Claimant) 3 - Tulsi Das, S/o. Harishchandra, Aged About 18 Years, R/o. Village Piparkharkala, Police Station Bortalva, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. (Claimant) 4 - Kamlesh Machhirke, S/o. Bhuneshwar, Aged About 29 Years, R/o. Village Piparkharkala, Post And Police Station Bortalav, Tahsil ASHOK SAHU Digitally signed by ASHOK SAHU Date: 2025.09.01 10:24:16 +0530 2 Dongargarh, District, Rajnandgoan, Chhattisgarh. (Driver Of Vehicle Tractor No. C.G. 08P. 6912) 5 - Lekhuram Lodhi, S/o. Tikam Ram Lodhi, Aged About 58 Years, R/o. Village Piparkhar Kala, Post And Police Station Bortalav, Tahsil Dongargarh, District Rajnandgoan, Chhattisgarh. (Owner Of Vehicle Tractor No. C.G. 08 P. 6912) ... Respondents For Appellant : Mr. Harshmander Rastogi, Advocate For Respondents No.1 & 2 : Mr. Parag Kotecha, Advocate (Single Bench) Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment on Board 29.08.2025 1. The appellant/insurance company has preferred this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 calling in question the legality, validity and correctness of the impugned award dated 28.08.2021 passed by the learned Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dongargarh, Distt. Rajnandgaon in Claim Case No.05/ 2019, by which the claim application of the claimants has been allowed and the liability has been fastened upon the insurance company to pay the amount of compensation of 3 Rs12,44,000/- to the claimants along-with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of claim application. 2. Mr. Harshmander Rastogi, learned counsel for appellant/ insurance company, would submit that the finding recorded by the learned Claims Tribunal that the driver of the offending vehicle did have valid and effective licence is erroneous, as the driver did not have valid and effective licence to drive the vehicle. He further submits that the deceased was traveling as gratuitous passenger in the offending vehicle, therefore, the insurance company is not liable to pay the compensation and, as such, the impugned award be set aside and the appeal be allowed. 3. Mr. Parag Kotecha, learned counsel for the claimants/ respondent No.1 to 3 would support the impugned award and submit that the appeal of the insurance company is liable to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and gone through the records minutely. 5. In para 18 of the impugned award, the learned Claims Tribunal has clearly recoded a finding that the insurance company has failed to establish that the driver of the 4 offending vehicle did not have a valid and effective driving licence to drive the vehicle, which is correct finding of fact based on material available on record. So far as the next submission that the deceased was traveling as gratuitous passenger in the offending vehicle, though the insurance company has examined two witnesses namely Ramkaran Ratre & Mitesh Kumar, but they have not stated that the deceased was sitting in the tractor as gratuitous passenger except relying upon the document Ex.D-4 & Ex.D-5. In that view of the matter, the learned Claims Tribunal has rightly fastened the liability upon the insurance company. As such, the appeal, being devoid of merit, deserves to be and is accordingly dismissed. The parties shall bear their own cost. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Ashok