Page No.1 of 3 IN MAC-126-2022 2025:CGHC:37228 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 126 of 2022 [Arising out of award dated 01.10.2021, passed in Claim Case No.108/2018 (Parmila Sarthi v. Sarju Chauhan) by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Janjgir-Champa (CG)] The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Branch Office, Iind Floor, Sunalia Building, Satigudi Chowk Sadar Bazar, Raigarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant Versus 1 - Parmila Sarthi Wd/o Late Shambhu Lal Sarthi, Aged About 52 Years R/o Ward No. 14, Janjgir, Tahsil And P.S. Janjgir, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh 2 - Sarju Chouhan S/o Ratan Lal Chouhan, Aged About 35 Years R/o Dhimarapur, Raigarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 3 - Smt. Padma Chauhan, Wd/o Late Jailal Chauhan, R/o Ward No. 04 Kharsia Road, Raigarh, District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh), District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents [Cause-title taken from Case Information System (CIS)] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Appellant : Mr. Dashrath Gupta, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Ankush Gupta, Advocate ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Single Bench: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal (Order on Board) 30.07.2025 1. In this appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 (for short the “MV Act”), the appellant- Insurance Company is SAIFAN KHAN Digitally signed by SAIFAN KHAN Page No.2 of 3 IN MAC-126-2022 calling in question the legality, validity and correctness of impugned award dated 01.10.2021, passed in Claim Case No.108/2018 (Parmila Sarthi v. Sarju Chauhan) by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Janjgir- Champa (CG) [for short the “MACT”], whereby the claim application filed by the respondent No.01/claimant has been allowed and compensation to the tune of Rs.9,84,200/- has been awarded alongwith interest @ 7.5% PA from the date of claim on account of death of son of the claimant, namely, Amit Kumar in an accident occurred on 29.06.2015. 2. Mr. Dashrath Gupta, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the learned MACT is absolutely unjustified in allowing the claim application of the claimant. He vehemently argued that on the date of occurrence, the deceased was travelling in a light goods carrying vehicle as a passenger that too in an open place, therefore, the insurance company is not liable to pay compensation to the claimant. He also submits that as per the insurance policy, only the driver and one another person sitting in the cabin of the offending vehicle was insured, but since the deceased was sitting in the open space of the offending vehicle, there was breach of the terms and conditions of the policy condition, therefore, the insurance company cannot be held liable to pay compensation. As such, the impugned award is liable to be set aside and present appeal deserves to be allowed. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents supported the impugned award and prays for dismissal of this appeal. Page No.3 of 3 IN MAC-126-2022 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made hereinabove and went through the record with utmost circumspection. 5. In the instant case, it is not in dispute that the subject insurance policy covered the risk of driver and one another person, who used to sit in the cabin of the offending vehicle, which is light goods carrying vehicle, but on the date of occurrence, the deceased was sitting in the open space of the said vehicle. However, the learned MACT while allowing the claim application of the claimant recorded a finding that the deceased was sitting in the open space of the offending vehicle just for the security of the poclain machine, which was being transported in the said vehicle and, on that basis, fastened the liability on the insurance company to pay compensation to the claimant. Even otherwise, exoneration of insurance company from its liability to pay compensation on this ground would not be proper, as the deceased was sitting in the open space of the offending vehicle for the security of the poclain machine and it would also not amount to fundamental breach of the policy. As such, I do not find any perversity or illegality in the findings recorded by the learned MACT, as the same is neither perverse nor contrary to the record. Consequently, appeal is liable to be dismissed. 6. Accordingly, I do not find any merit in this appeal and same is hereby dismissed. No cost. s@if Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge