Page No.1 of 3 IN MAC-910-2022 2025:CGHC:45703 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 910 of 2022 [Arising out of order dated 11.03.2022, passed in Claim Case No.50/2020 ( Mohit Narayan Chandrakar v. Sanjay Kumar Mandavi and another) by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dhamtari (CG)] 1 - Mohit Narayan Chandrakar S/o Late Yadram Chandrakar Aged About 40 Years R/o Gokulpur, Rudri Road, Dhamtari, Tehsil And District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant/ Claimant Versus 1 - Sanjay Kumar Mandavi S/o Jairam Mandavi Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Korar, Police Station Korar, Tehsil Narharpur, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh (Owner And Driver Of Car No. Cg/19/bf/4025) 2 - Branch Manager National Insurance Company Limited, 2nd Floor, Mobin Mahal, Lal Ganga Shopping Mall Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh (Insurer Of Car No. Cg/19/bf/4025). ... Respondents [Cause-title taken from Case Information System (CIS)] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Appellant : Mr. Praveen Dhurandhar, Advocate For Respondent No.1 : Ms. Devanshi Chakraborty, Advocate For Respondent No.2 : Mr. Qamrul Aziz, Advocate ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Single Bench: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal (Judgment on Board) 08.09.2025 1. This appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, SAIFAN KHAN Digitally signed by SAIFAN KHAN Page No.2 of 3 IN MAC-910-2022 1988 (for short the “Act of 1988”) has been preferred by the appellant/Claimant challenging the impugned order dated 11.03.2022, passed in Claim Case No.50/2020 (Mohit Narayan Chandrakar v. Sanjay Kumar Mandavi and another) by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dhamtari (CG) [for short the “Claims Tribunal”], whereby the learned Claims Tribunal has rejected the claim application of the appellant/claimant on the ground that the ownership of the damaged vehicle bearing No.CG-04-B-8160 (Maruti Aloto Car) has not been proved. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that according to the documents filed by the respondent No.02- Insurance Company herein alongwith Covering Memo dated 08.09.2025 (i.e. RC verification report dt. 02.09.2025 and copy of vehicle particulars of RTO, Bilaspur with regard to vehicle bearing No.CG-04-B-8160) it is clear that the appellant/claimant herein is the owner of the said vehicle and, therefore, the learned Claims Tribunal has erred in law while rejecting the claim application of the appellant on the ground that the ownership of the said damaged vehicle has not been proved. 3. In that view of the matter, since as per the said documents (i.e. RC verification report dt. 02.09.2025 and copy of vehicle particulars of RTO, Bilaspur with regard to vehicle bearing No.CG-04-B-8160), filed by the respondent No.02- Insurance Company, it is crystal clear that said vehicle i.e. Maruti Aloto Car bearing No.CG-04-B-8160 is Page No.3 of 3 IN MAC-910-2022 owned by the appellant herein, therefore, the impugned order dt. 11.03.2022, passed by the learned Claims Tribunal is hereby set aside. The matter is remitted to the learned Claim Tribunal for consideration of appellant’s claim application afresh on merits in accordance with law expeditiously. 4. With aforesaid observation and direction, this appeal stands finally disposed of. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge s@if