Page No.1 of 3 IN MAC-97-2023 2025:CGHC:43357 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 97 of 2023 [Arising out of order dated 12.12.2022, passed in Claim Case No.66 of 2020 (Santosh and another v. Pramila Sahu and another) by the 1st Addl. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bemetara (CG)] 1 - Santosh S/o Late Tularam Sahu Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Taralim, P.S. And Tahsil Berla, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh 2 - Kejiya Bai W/o Late Tularam Sahu Aged About 62 Years R/o Village Taralim, P.S. And Tahsil Berla, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh. ... Appellants/ Claimants Versus 1 - Pramila Sahu W/o Nirmal Sahu Aged About 32 Years R/o Village Surujpura, Tahsil Berla, District Bemetara (Chhattisgarh) 2 - The New India Insurance Company Ltd. Through Branch Manager, Address Branch Office, Dubey Complex, First Floor, Near Basant Talkies, Shivaji Market G.E. Road, Camp-2, Bhilai, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents [Cause-title taken from Case Information System (CIS)] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Appellants : Mr. B.L. Sahu, Advocate For Respondent No.01 : Mr. A.K. Sahu, Advocate For Respondent No.02 : Mr. Dashrath Gupta, Advocate ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Single Bench: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal (Order on Board) 26.08.2025 1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short the “Act of 1988”) has been preferred by the appellants/claimants SAIFAN KHAN Digitally signed by SAIFAN KHAN Page No.2 of 3 IN MAC-97-2023 against the impugned order dated 12.12.2022, passed in Claim Case No.66 of 2020 (Santosh and another v. Pramila Sahu and another) by the 1st Addl. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bemetara (CG), whereby learned Claims Tribunal has rejected the claim application of the appellants/claimants herein. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that in the present case, the original claimant is Tularam Sahu, who suffered injuries in motor accident which occurred on 04.05.2020 and, therefore, filed claim application before the learned Claims Tribunal. Thereafter, during the pendency of the claim application, said Tularam Sahu died and, as a consequence of his death, his son and wife (appellants herein) being the legal representative were impleaded as claimants before the learned Claims Tribunal. However, since other sons of the original claimant- Tularam Sahu were not impleaded as claimant, therefore, the learned Claims Tribunal rejected the claim application, which is bad and unsustainable in law. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondent would support the impugned order and prays for dismissal of this appeal. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submission made herein above and went through the record with utmost circumspection. Page No.3 of 3 IN MAC-97-2023 5. True it is that the other legal representative of the original claimant- Tularam Sahu were not impleaded as claimant before the learned Claims Tribunal, but the learned Claims Tribunal ought to have granted opportunity to do the needful in this regard to the appellants herein and should not have directly rejected the claim application, as the same is impermissible and bad in law. As such, the impugned order dt. 12.12.2022, passed by the learned Claims Tribunal is hereby set aside. The matter is remitted to the concerned Claims Tribunal for hearing and disposal of the claims application of the appellants herein afresh strictly in accordance with law. The appellants are at liberty to file necessary application for amendment/impleadment of other legal representative of the original claimant- Tularam Sahu before the learned Claims Tribunal. If required, additional evidence may also be recorded by the learned Claims Tribunal and, thereafter, matte shall be finally concluded within 03 months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 6. With aforesaid observation and direction and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the present MAC stands finally disposed of. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge s@if