1 2025:CGHC:48623 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 713 of 2023 The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd, Through Divisional Manager, Divisional Office, Opposite Rajiv Plaza, Bus Stand, Bilaspur, Tehsil And District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. (Then Then Insurer Of Vehicle Tractor No. CG 11 DA 4283 & Trolley No.C.G. 11 D 2771) (Insurance Policy No. 192405/47/2017/539 Insurance Period Dated 26-03-2017 To 25-03-2018) --- Appellant versus 1 - Smt. Rathbai Shrivas, W/o. Salikram Shrivas, Aged About 45 Years, R/o. Village Jairamnagar, Tehsil And Thana Masturi, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Shri Salikram Shrivas, S/o. Late Jeetram Shrivas, Aged About 50 Years, R/o. Village Jairamnagar, Tehsil And Thana Masturi, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Kumari Uma Shrivas, D/o. Shri Salikram Shrivas, Aged About 27 Years, R/o. Village Jairamnagar, Tehsil And Thana Masturi, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ASHOK SAHU Digitally signed by ASHOK SAHU Date: 2025.09.23 18:10:41 +0530 2 4 - Prashant Kumar Shrivas, S/o. Shri Salikram Shrivas, Aged About 23 Years, R/o. Village Jairamnagar, Tehsil And Thana Masturi, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Dilip Kumar Burman, S/o. Shri Chandrika Prasad Burman, Aged About 30 Years, R/o. Village Mauhadih, Post Kapan, Police Outpost Naila, Thana Janjgir, District Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh. (Then Driver Of Vehicle Tractor No. Cg 11 DA 4283 & Trolley No. CG 11 D 2771) 6 - Devi Prasad Kaushik, S/o. Shyamlal Kaushik, Aged About 66 Years, R/o. Village Mouhadih, Post Kapan, Police Outpost Naila, Thana Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh. (Then Reg. Owner Of Vehicle Tractor No. CG 11 DA 4283 & Trolley No. CG 11 D 2771) 7 - Yotsna Singh, S/o. Shri Durga Prasad, R/o. Village Mouhadih, Post Kapan, Police Chowki Naila, Police Station Akaltara, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) --- Respondents & MAC No. 701 of 2023 1 - The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Through Divisional Manager, Divisional Office, Opposite Rajiv Plaza, Bus Stand, Bilaspur, Tehsil And District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh...............(Then Then Insurer Of Vehicle Tractor No. C.G.11.DA.4283 & Trolley No. C.G.11D 2771) Insurance Policy No.192405/47/2017/539 Insurance Period Dated 26-03-2017 To 25-03-2018. ---Appellant 3 Versus 1 - Rajaram Audheliya (Odhliya), S/o. Late Shri Khurshal, Aged About 53 Years, R/o. Khaira, Tahsil And Police Station Masturi, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh...........Claimant. 2 - Dilip Kumar Burman, S/o. Shri Chandrika Prasad Burman, Aged About 30 Years, R/o. Village Mauhadih, Post Kapan, Police Outpost- Naila, Thana Janjgir, District Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh..................(Then Driver Of Vehicle Tractor No. C.G.- 11-DA-4283 & Trolley No. C.G.-11-D-2771) 3 - Devi Prasad Kaushik, S/o. Shyamlal Kaushik, Aged About 66 Years, R/o. Village Mouhadih, Post Kapan, Police Outpost- Naila, Thana Janjgir, District Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh.................. (Then Regd. Owner Of Vehicle Tractor No. C.G.-11-DA 4283 & Trolley No. C.G.-11-D 2771) 4 - Yotsna Singh, S/o. Shri Durga Prasad, R/o. Village Mouhadih, Post Kapan, Police Chowki- Naila, Police Station Akaltara, District Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondents For Appellant : Mr. Akash Shrivastava, Advocate For Claimants/ Respondents : Mr. Anand Kesharwani, Advocate (Single Bench) Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment on Board 4 22.09.2025 1. Since both the appeals have been arisen from one accident, they have been clubbed together, heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. The appellant/insurance company has preferred these appeals under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 calling in question the legality, validity and correctness of the two impugned award dated 11.01.2023 passed by the learned Second Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur, by which in Claim Case No. 711/2018, compensation of Rs. 19,19,728/- has been awarded to the claimants and in Claim Case No.712/2018, compensation of Rs.12,95,224/- has been awarded to the claimant along-with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of claim application and the liability has been fastened upon the appellant/ insurance company. 3. Mr. Akash Shrivastava, learned counsel appearing for the appellant/ insurance company, in both the appeals would submit that the vehicle was being driven by respondent Dilip Kumar Burman and charge sheet has also been filed against him for offence under Section 304-A of I.P.C. but after three months, since he did not have a valid driving licence, 5 therefore, respondent Yotsna Singh, who has driving licence, is said to have impleaded as respondent before the Claims Tribunal that he was driving the vehicle so that the compensation amount be recovered promptly from the insurance company, therefore, the insurance company be exonerated from its liability to pay compensation. 4. Mr. 4. Mr. Anand Kesharwani, learned counsel for the claimants, would submit that Dilip Kumar Burman, driver, against whom charge sheet has been filed, has been examined and he has clearly stated that respondent Yotsna Singh was driving the vehicle and he was sitting in the vehicle, which remains uncontroverted and the insurance company has not led any evidence to prove the said fact, therefore, the insurance company has rightly been fastened the liability to pay compensation. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and gone through the records minutely. 6. A careful perusal of the FIR (Ex.P-1), Dehati Nalsy (Ex.P-2) & Dead body panchnama (Ex.P-5) would show that the offence has been registered against the driver of the Tractor bearing registration No.C.G.11-DA-4283 and name has not been 6 mentioned. However, Dilip Kumar Burman has examined himself before the Court and he has clearly stated that respondent Yotsna Singh was driving the vehicle and as per the instruction, he was sitting as labourer in that vehicle. On behalf of the insurance company, such statement has not been contradicted, though Dilip Kumar Burman has stated that the offence has been registered against him and pending consideration before the criminal Court and offence under Section 3/181 of the Motor Vehicles Act for not having driving licence also was registered. The Claims Tribunal considering the statement of Dilip Kumar Burman and further finding that Yotsna Singh has not been examined, came to the conclusion that respondent Yotsna Singh was driving the vehicle, which was also established from the statement of eye-witness to the accident namely Dilip Kumar Burman and, as such, Tribunal has rightly reached to the conclusion that Dilip Kumar Burman was not driving the vehicle and Yotsna Singh was driving the vehicle and proceeded to grant compensation and fastened the liability upon the appellant/ insurance company, as the insurance company did not lead any evidence to prove the said fact except taking the plea in the written statement. In that view of the matter, I do not find 7 any merit in both the appeals and accordingly the same deserves to be and hereby dismissed. 7. In MAC No.713/2023, learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the deceased was bachelor, aged about 20 years and therefore 1/2 has to be deducted towards personal expenses, but the learned Claims Tribunal has deducted 1/3 relying upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the matter of Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Ors1. However, the learned Claims Tribunal has clearly recorded a finding that the deceased was unmarried and family of the deceased was large as he had father, mother, sister & brother and in that view of the matter, the learned Claims Tribunal has rightly proceeded to deduct 1/2 towards personal expenses of the deceased, which is in accordance with law. However, in MAC No.701/2023, since the deceased was 26 years and was unmarried and number of dependent is only 1, the trial Court has deducted 1/2 towards personal expenses, which is also in accordance with law, warrants no interference. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Ashok Judge 1 (2009) 6 SCC 121