1 2025:CGHC:39608 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1162 of 2025 1 - Magma H.D.I. General Insurance Company Limited Through - Its Legal Manager, Present Address - Office No. 501 And 512, 5th Floor D.B. City Corporate Park, Block No. 9, Rajbandha Maidan, Raipur (C.G.) --- Appellant versus 1 - Smt. Reema Kanouje W/o Late Shiv Kumar, Aged About 23 Years 2 - Himanshu Kanouje S/o Late Shiv Kumar, Aged About 5 Years 3 - Ananya Kanouje D/o Late Shivkumar Aged About 3 Years Respondents No.2 And 3 Being Minor Through Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Reema Kanouje, W/o Late Shivkumar Kanouje, Aged 23 Years. All are R/o Ward No. 13 Nehru Nagar Bhilai - 03, Bhilai Charoda, District - Durg (C.G.) 4 - Maya Kanouje W/o Rakesh Kanouje, Aged About 47 Years 5 - Rakesh Kanouje, S/o Late Kanthilal Kanouje, Aged About 51 Years No.4 and 5 both are R/o Ward No. 13 Nehru Nagar Bhilai - 03, Bhilai Charoda, District - Durg (C.G.) 6 - Gurdeep Singh S/o Late Rajinder Singh Aged About 50 Years Present Address - Shankar Nagar, Durg, Ward No. 10, P.S. Mohan Nagar Durg, District - Durg (C.G.) --- Respondents For Appellant : Mr. Sourabh Sharma, Advocate with Ms. Harneet Kaur Khanuja, Advocate For Respondents No.1 to 5 : Mr. Varun Chakraworthy, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order On Board BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN Digitally signed by BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN Date: 2025.09.03 11:01:20 +0530 2 07/08/2025 1. Appellant/Insurance Company has filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short ‘the Act of 1988’) challenging the impugned award dated 07.12.2024, passed in Claim Case No.249 of 2022, whereby the learned Fifth Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Durg, District – Durg (C.G.) (for short ‘the Claims Tribunal’) allowed the application filed under Section 166 of the Act of 1988 by claimants/respondent No.1 to 5, in part, awarded total compensation of Rs.22,47,672/-, fastened liability to satisfy the amount of compensation on non-applicants jointly and severally. 2. Facts relevant for disposal of this appeal are that an application under Section 166 of the Act, 1988 was filed by the claimants/respondents No.1 to 5 seeking total compensation of Rs.39,83,000/- against the death of Shiv Kumar Kannouje, who died in a road accident. It was pleaded that on 17.11.2021 at around 12:00 PM, Shiv Kumar was returning to his home in Bhilai on his motorcycle after completing his work. When he reached near Palika Market, Bhilai Charouda, a Bolero vehicle bearing registration No. CG-07/AX-9829 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the offending vehicle’), being driven by non-applicant No. 1 in a rash and negligent manner, dashed the motor cycle driven by Shiv Kumar and caused accient. As a result of the accident, Shiv Kumar suffered fatal injuries and died on the spot. It was further pleaded that matter was reported to the Police Station Old Bhilai, Durg upon which crime was registered against non-applicant No.1/driver of offending vehicle and after completion of investigation charge-sheet was filed. 3 3. Non-applicants No.1 did not participate in the proceeding and he was proceeded ex-parte, no reply was filed on his behalf. 4. Non-applicant No.2 filed reply to claim application denying the averments made therein. Non-applicant No.2 mainly denied the occupation and income of the deceased and further pleaded that non- applicant No.1 was not holding valid and effective driving license to drive the offending vehicle and it was being plied in breach of conditions of insurance policy. It was further pleaded that the offending vehicle was falsely involved in the aforesaid accident in collusion with the police officials to get the compensation. It was further pleaded that, as per the morgue intimation, accident had initially been reported as having been caused by an unknown vehicle. However, the FIR was registered after two months of accident, implicating the driver of Bolero vehicle bearing registration No. CG-07/AX-9829, which raises doubt and suspicion. 5. Learned Claims Tribunal upon appreciation of the pleadings and the evidence brought on record by respective parties, allowed the claim application in part, awarded total compensation of Rs.22,47,672/- and fastened liability upon non-applicants to satisfy the amount of compensation jointly and severally. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company filed this appeal on the ground that the offending vehicle Bolero bearing No. C.G.07- AX-9829 insured by appellant/Insurance Company was falsely involved and implanted in road accident. It is contended that there is no mention of vehicle number with which the accident occurred in the Naksha Panchnama and Morgue Intimation, therefore, it is clear that 4 mention of Bolero as offending vehicle, in the FIR subsequently is an afterthought. 7. Learned counsel for claimants/respondents No.1 to 5 opposes the submission of learned counsel for appellant and would submit that after investigation into the present crime, police filed charge-sheet against driver of offending vehicle, who was driving offending vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and has caused accident. It is contended that learned Claims Tribunal has rightly concluded that accident has been caused by offending vehicle. It is also contended that in cases of motor accident, strict rules of evidence is not applicable. The impugned award passed by learned Claims Tribunal is upon appreciation of entire documentary and oral evidence brought on record, which does not call for any interference. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the Claims Tribunal. 9. So far as the submission of learned counsel for appellant/Insurance Company regarding implantation of offending vehicle in the instant accident is concerned, perusal of the record would show that accident occurred on 07.11.2021. Morgue was reported to the concerned police station on 17.11.2021 at about 18.10 o’clock mentioning that on 17.11.2021 at about 12:00 PM, while deceased was returning to his home on his motorcycle after completing his work, reached near Palika Market, Bhilai Charouda, the driver of unknown Bolero vehicle while driving the said vehicle in rash and negligent manner dashed the deceased and caused accident. Thereafter mourge was enquired, spot map (Ex.P-7) and Naksha Panchayatnama (Ex.P-8) was prepared, 5 body of the deceased was sent for postmortem vide Ex.P-9, mentioning the same fact that deceased Shiv Kumar Kannouje died in a accident caused by by driver of unknown Bolero vehicle. Statement of the witnesses were recorded and after mourge inquiry it was found that accident was caused by the offending vehicle bearing No.C.G.07- AX- 9829, driven by non-applicant No.1 in rash and negligent manner, FIR was registered on 13.01.2022 against non-applicant No.1, driver of offending vehicle. After registration of FIR, offending vehicle was seized vide (Ex.P-11) and non-applicant No.1 was arrested vide (Ex.P- 12) and after completion of investigation finding non-applicant No.1 guilty for causing accident, charge-sheet was filed against non- applicant No.1 in the Court of competent jurisdiction, for alleged offence U/s.304-A of the Indian Penal Code. 10. To prove their case, claimants have examined Smt. Rima Kannouje as (A.W.-1), who in her evidence stated according to the pleadings made in claim application and proved the documents of criminal case placed on record from Ex. P-1 to P-13. Claimants also examined Yashraj Hans as A.W.-2, who is an eyewitness to the accident. In his evidence, he stated that accident occurred near Padum Nagar, Bhilai-3. On the date and time of accident when he was travelling in his motorcycle from Sirsa Gate towards Kali Temple, he saw a Bolero Pickup bearing No. CG 07/AX/9829 coming from Durg, driver of the said vehicle was driving in a rash and negligent manner, dashed with the motorcyclist and caused accident. He stated that he noted number of vehicle and informed the bystanders. He further stated that three to four days after accident, while he was sitting at Sirsa Gate, he was informed by his 6 friends that family members of deceased is searching for number of vehicle involved in accident and since he had noted the number, he went to house of deceased to inform them about vehicle involved in the accident. In cross-examination, he denied all the averse suggestions given on behalf of non-applicant No.2 and nothing adverse has come in his cross-examination so as to disbelieve his statement. 11. In light of the above discussion and evidence on record, plea raised by the Insurance Company regarding false implication of the offending vehicle is found to be without merit. The sequence of events, beginning with the reporting of accident, morgue inquiry, preparation of relevant documents, subsequent registration of the FIR after identification of the offending vehicle (Bolero Pickup No. CG 07/AX/9829), its seizure, and the filing of charge sheet against the driver, clearly establish the involvement of the said vehicle. Furthermore, evidence of eyewitness Yashraj Hans (A.W.-2), who witnessed the accident, noted the vehicle number, and later provided this crucial information to family of deceased, remained consistent and unshaken during cross-examination. His statement is also corroborated by documentary evidence placed on records by the claimants. Thus, the Insurance Company failed to substantiate its claim of false involvement of the offending vehicle. No other ground is raised by learned counsel for appellant, before this Court, Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that the finding recorded by the learned Claims Tribunal that on the date of the accident, Non- Applicant No. 1, while driving the offending vehicle in a rash and 7 negligent manner, caused accident resulting in death of Shiv Kumar, is based on a proper appreciation of the documentary and oral evidence brought on record by the respective parties, which does not call for any interference 12. Accordingly, appeal, being devoid of substance, is liable to be and it is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Balram