1 MAC No. 175 of 2022 2025:CGHC:37144 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 175 of 2022  Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd., through – Divisional Office, Shiv Mohan Bhawan, Pandri Road Raipur, Tahsil & District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant versus 1. Smt. Rukhmani Yadav W/o Late Sanju Yadav, aged about 23 years, House Wife; 2. Rudra Kumar @ Rustam Yadav S/o Late Sanju Yadav, aged about 7 years; minor through Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Rukhmani Yadav; 3. Gayatri Yadav W/o Shri Benuram Yadav; All respondents are R/o Village Singhora, Police Station Patewa, Tahsil & District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh. .. (Claimants) 4. Manoj Kumar Vishwakarma S/o Anuj Vishwakarma, aged about 25 years, R/o Village Ghodhari, Post – Birkoni, Police Station, Tahsil & District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. .. (Driver) 5. Tikelal Jalkshatri S/o Late Kumar Jalkshatri, R/o Village Khairjhiti, Police Station Tumgaon, Tahsil & District – Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh. .. (Owner) ... Respondents ANKIT KUMAR SINGH Digitally signed by ANKIT KUMAR SINGH Date: 2025.07.31 10:14:17 +0530 2 MAC No. 175 of 2022 For Appellant :- Mr. Raj Awasthi, Advocate. For Respondents :- None. SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment On Board 29.07 .2025 1. The appellant has preferred this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “Act of 1988”) against the impugned award dated 29.10.2021 passed by the 1st Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mahasamund, District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh (for short “Claims Tribunal”) in M.A.C.C No. H–74 /2018, by which the liability to pay the compensation has been fastened upon the Insurance Company/appellant herein. 2. Mr. Raj Awasthi, learned counsel for the appellant, would submit that the learned Claims Tribunal has committed gross error in fastening the liability upon the insurance company, as the vehicle in question, in the present case, was not involved in the incident and the same has not been proved by the claimants also, therefore, the impugned award is liable to be dismissed and the present appeal deserves to be allowed. 3 MAC No. 175 of 2022 3. None for the respondents, though served. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and gone through the records with utmost circumspection. 5. In the present case, the Claims Tribunal after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence available on record has recorded a finding that the vehicle in question/offending vehicle bearing registration No. CG– 06–GG–6157 was involved in the incident and was being rashly and negligently driven by respondent No.4 herein on 21.03.2017; owned by respondent No.5 herein and insured by appellant herein, by which Sanju Yadav died, which is correct finding of fact based on evidence available on record and the same is neither perverse nor contrary to the records. Accordingly, I hereby affirmt the said finding. 6. In view of the above, I do not find any merit in the instant appeal, it deserves to be and is accordingly dismissed. No order as to cost(s). Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Ankit