1 (MAC No. 777 of 2022) 2025:CGHC:38534 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 777 of 2022 1 - The New India Assurance Company Limited Through Its Devisional Manager, Divisional Office No. 1, Madina Building, Kutchery Chowk Raipur , Distt. - Raipur Chhattisgarh --- Appellant(s) versus 1 - Tijiya Bai Nishad W/o Late Fuluram Nishad Aged About 49 Years R/o - Ward No. - 04, Fingeshwar , Tahsil - Rajim, P.S. - Fingeshwar And Distt. Gariyaband Chhattisgarh 2 - Budharu Ram Nishad S/o Late Fulu Ram Nishad Aged About 34 Years R/o - Ward No. - 04, Fingeshwar , Tahsil - Rajim, P.S. - Fingeshwar And Distt. Gariyaband Chhattisgarh 3 - Tikaram Nishad S/o Late Fulu Ram Nishad Aged About 20 Years R/o - Ward No. - 04, Fingeshwar , Tahsil - Rajim, P.S. - Fingeshwar And Distt. Gariyaband Chhattisgarh 4 - Basant Lavlekar S/o Late Bhuwneshwar Lavlekar Aged About 50 Years Hal Mukam-Fingeshwar, Tahsil - Rajim , Distt. Gariyaband Chhattisgarh Permanent Address - Vill.- Aamdi, Shikshak Nagar, Gariyaband , Distt. Gariyaband Chhattisgarh (Driver) 5 - Smt. Neetu Sahu W/o Late Dhanesh Sahu Aged About 36 Years R/o Village Bijali, P.S. Fingeshwar, Distt. - Gariyaband Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) For Appellant :- Mr. Dashrath Gupta, Advocate For Respondents :- None though served. ADITI DIWAN KAIWART Digitally signed by ADITI DIWAN KAIWART Date: 2025.08.06 15:19:50 +0530 2 (MAC No. 777 of 2022) SB - Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment On Board 04.08.2025 1. The appellant/insurance company 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 impugned award dated 17.01.2022 (Annexure A/1) passed by learned Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gariyaband, District Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh, by which the liability to pay the amount of compensation to the claimants has been fastened upon the insurance company. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that learned Claims Tribunal is absolutely unjustified in holding that the driver/respondent No.4 was having the valid and effective driving license on the date of accident and has wrongly fastened the liability to pay the amount of compensation upon the insurance company and, thereby, has committed a legal error. 3. None for the respondents though served. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the records with utmost circumspection. 3 (MAC No. 777 of 2022) 5. Learned Claims Tribunal has categorically recorded a finding that the driver/respondent No.4 had a valid and effective driving license on the date of accident and that no evidence has been led by the insurance company to demonstrate that driver – Basant Lavlekar did not have the valid driving license on the date of incident. As such, the said finding recorded by the Claims Tribunal is a correct finding of facts based on the materials available on record and the same is neither perverse nor contrary to the record and the learned Claims Tribunal has rightly fastened the liability to pay the amount of compensation upon the insurance company. Therefore, I do not find any good ground to entertain the instant appeal. 6. Accordingly, this appeal deserves to be and is accordingly, dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own cost(s). Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge @d!t!