1 MAC No. 111 of 2022 2025:CGHC:39938 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 111 of 2022  Magma H.D.I. General Insurance Company Limited, Through- Branch Manager, Branch Office-Kirti Complex, Rajendra Nagar Chowk, Link Raod, Bilaspur, Tahsil & District - Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant versus 1. Ku. Deepika Sinha D/o Late Suraj Sinha, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Motitalab Para, Jagdalpur, Post Jagdalpur, District- Bastar, Chhattisgarh. …….. (Claimant) 2. Kanwaljeet Singh Khalsa S/o Late Harnam Singh Khalsa, Aged About 49 Years, R/o Dewangan Chowk, House of Kiran Saheb, Dhamtari, P.S.- Kotwali, District- Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. …… (Driver) 3. Mukesh Pawar S/o Shri Anupchand Pawar, Aged About 27 Years, R/o 126/a, Ramaiyya Ward No. 17, Jagdalpur, District- Bastar, Chhattisgarh. …….. (Owner) ... Respondents For Appellant :- Mr. Sourabh Gupta, Advocate. For Respondent No.1 :- Mr. Aditya K. Mishra, Advocate. For Respondent No.3 :- Mr. K.N. Mehar, Advocate. ANKIT KUMAR SINGH Digitally signed by ANKIT KUMAR SINGH Date: 2025.08.14 18:01:15 +0530 2 MAC No. 111 of 2022 SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment On Board 08.08 .2025 1. The appellant has preferred this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “Act of 1988”) calling in question the legality, validity and correctness of the impugned award dated 16.09.2021 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bastar at Jagdalpur, Chhattisgarh (for short “Claims Tribunal”) in Claim Case No. 118/2019, by which the Claims Tribunal has fastened the liability upon the Insurance Company to pay compensation of ₹13,07,984/- along with the interest to the claimant. 2. Mr. Sourabh Gupta, learned counsel for the appellant, would submit that the learned Claims Tribunal has committed gross error in granting compensation amount of ₹3,10,672/- along with the interest to the claimant without appreciating the fact of false implantation of driver-Kanwaljeet Singh Khalsa/respondent No.2 herein in offending vehicle bearing Registration No.CG-13-U-2700 owned by Mukesh Pawar/respondent No.3 herein and insured by the appellant herein, in order to recover the amount of compensation from 3 MAC No. 111 of 2022 the Insurance Company, therefore, the Insurance Company is not liable to pay the aforesaid amount. 3. Mr. Aditya K. Misrha and Mr. 3. Mr. Aditya K. Misrha and Mr. K.N. Mehar, learned counsels for respondents No. 1 & No.3, respectively, would support the impugned award passed by the Claims Tribunal and submit that with regard to the plea of false implication, no evidence has been brought on record by the Insurance Company, therefore, the instant appeal deserves to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submission made herein-above and gone through the records with utmost circumspection. 5. It is the submission of learned counsel for the Insurance Company that the deceased himself was driving the offending vehicle bearing Registration No.CG-13-U-2700 and driver- Kanwaljeet Singh Khalsa/respondent No.2 herein has falsely been implanted in the offending vehicle to get the compensation amount from the Insurance Company. However, a careful perusal of the written statement of the Insurance Company, would show that no plea has been taken to the fact that the driver/respondent No.2 was not driving the offending vehicle and same was driven by the deceased 4 MAC No. 111 of 2022 himself and even in that regard no evidence has been brought on record by the Insurance Company. As such, the Insurance Company has failed to prove its plea of false implantation of driver in the offending vehicle. 6. In that view of the matter, I do not find any merit in the instant appeal, it deserves to be and is accordingly dismissed. No order as to cost(s). Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Ankit