1 2025:CGHC:31412 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 573 of 2018 1 - Smt. Sarita Panigrahi W/o Jitendra Panigrahi Aged About 36 Years R/o Village Jaitgiri Chowki Bakawand P.S. Karpawand District Bastar, Chhattisgarh (Owner), District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh ... Appellant(s) versus 1 - Smt. Rukani Wd/o Late Madan Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Chhinari (Kshamapur) Tahsil Bakawnd P.S. Karpawand District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh. 2 - Miss Pratima D/o Late Madan Aged About 15 Years Minor Through Natural Guardian Smt. Rukani (Mother) R/o Village Chhinari (Kshamapur) Tahsil Bakawnd P.S. Karpawand District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh. 3 - Miss Shobhawati D/o Late Madan Aged About 14 Years Minor Through Natural Guardian Smt. Rukani (Mother), R/o Village Chhinari (Kshamapur) Tahsil Bakawnd P.S. Karpawand District Bastar, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh. 4 - Pinku S/o Late Madan Aged About 10 Years Minor Through Natural Guardian Smt. Rukani (Mother) R/o Village Chhinari (Kshamapur) Tahsil Bakawnd P.S. Karpawand District Bastar, Chhattisgarh (Claimants), District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh. Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 5 - Sundar Lal S/o Ganesh Ram Aged About 28 Years R/o Village Sanghkarmari P.S. Karpawand Tahsil Bakawand District Bastar, Chhattisgarh (Driver), District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh. 6 - The United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Through Branch Manager, Branch Office Near Anupama Talkies Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh (Insurer), District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Appellant(s) : Mr. Praveen Dhurandhar, Advocate. For Respondent(s) No. 1 to 5 : None. For Respondent No. 6 : Mr. B.N. Nande, Advocate. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 08/07/2025 1. The present is an Owner’s appeal assailing the award dated 06.09.2017 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jagdalpur, District - Bastar (C.G.) in Claim Case No. 59/2016, whereby the Claims Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs. 4,55,000/- with interest @ 9% per annum in favour of claimants/respondents No. 1 to 4 herein. 2. Brief facts of the case, is that, the appellant is the owner of the Tractor and Trolley bearing registration numbers CG-17/G/2061 and CG-17/O/2062 respectively, respondent Nos. 1 to 4 are the claimants and respondent No. 5 is the driver of the offending vehicle and respondent No. 6 is the insurer of the vehicle at the relevant time of the accident. As per the claim, the deceased 3 Madan died in a road accident on 25.04.2013, when he was called by respondent No. 5 and, upon his arrival, the vehicle was driven in a rash and negligent manner by respondent No. 5, resulting in severe injuries to the deceased, which led to his death. A criminal case was registered against respondent No. 5, and a charge sheet was filed in the competent court. Upon service of notice, the appellant and the insurance company appeared before the Claims Tribunal and contested the claim. The Claims Tribunal framed five issues for adjudication and recorded evidence from the claimants, the insurance company and the owner. After considering the pleadings, evidence, and material on record, the Tribunal, vide its award dated 06.09.2017, granted compensation to the tune of Rs. 4,55,000/- to the claimants. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant/owner has challenged the liability fastened upon the owner while exonerating insurance company holding that there is breach of policy of insurance policy by the owner. He further submits that the deceased Madan was travelling on the offending tractor owned by the appellant/owner. The tribunal on the basis of evidence found that the deceased was seated in the tractor where there is no place to sit and as such he was a gratuitous passenger on the tractor. He further submits that the tribunal has held that the owner has taken third 4 party insurance policy and as such the deceased was travelling on the tractor was not covered under the said policy which is erroneous finding. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent No. 6 submits that the claims tribunal has rightly came to the conclusion that the deceased was having gratuitous passenger and further as the insurance policy is third party policy. Hence, under any stretch of imagination, the insurance company cannot be held liable for the death of the deceased. The tribunal has rightly concluded and held that there was breach of insurance policy as such insurance company has rightly been exonerated while fastening liability upon the owner of the tractor. 5. None for respondents No. 1 to 5 i.e. claimants. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. From the perusal of the record and also upon perusal of the insurance policy, the evidence of the parties there is no illegality as such committed by the learned Claims Tribunal as the Claims Tribunal has considered the evidence and upon marshaling of evidence of the witnesses it has rightly held that there is breach of policy as such the driver and owner are held liable for payment of compensation as such the tribunal has not committed any error of law and same is not required to be interfered with. The 5 other conditions of the award would be as it is. 8. The insurance policy being third party insurance policy and the deceased being gratuitous passenger sitting on the mudguard of the tractor as such it is clear cut violation of insurance policy as such the liability has rightly been fastened upon the owner of the tractor. 9. Accordingly, the appeal fails and it is hereby dismissed. 10. The appellant/owner of the tractor shall deposit the entire amount of award within a period of 60 days from the production of copy of this order. SD/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat