1 2025:CGHC:17624 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1696 of 2018 1 - National Insurance Company Limited Through- Its Branch Manager, Branch Office- Kamthi Road, Rajnandgaon, Tahsil And District- Rajnandgaon (Chhattisgarh), .....(Insurer of Truck No. C.G. 04-J- 3125), .................... (Non Applicant No. 3). ... Appellant versus 1 - Smt. Dhaneshwari Deshlahare Wd/o Late Mohd. Irfan Ansari @ Irfan Deshlahare, Aged About 25 Years R/o Village- Anda, Police Station- Anda, Tahsil and District- Durg Chhattisgarh., Present Address- Maroda Tank, Police Station- Newai, District- Durg Chhattisgarh. .................. (Applicant No. 1). 2 - Ashish Deshlahare, S/o Mohd. Irfan Ansari @ Irfan Deshlahare, Aged About 3 Years Res. No. 2 Minor Through- Their Mother Smt. Dhaneshwari Deshlahare, Wd/o Late Mohd. Irfan Ansari @ Irfan Deshlahare (Res. No. 1), R/o Village- Anda, Police Station- Anda, Tahsil And District- Durg Chhattisgarh., Present Address- Maroda Tank, Police Station- Newai, District- Durg Chhattisgarh. ................ (Applicant No. 2). 3 - Ku. Aradhna Deshlahare, D/o Mohd. Irfan Ansari @ Irfan Deshlahare, Aged About 1 Years Res. No. 3 Minor Through- Their Mother Smt. Dhaneshwari Deshlahare, Wd/o Late Mohd. Irfan Ansari @ Irfan Deshlahare (Res. No. 1), R/o Village- Anda, Police Station- Anda, Tahsil and District- Durg Chhattisgarh., Present Address- Maroda Tank, Police Station- Newai, District- Durg Chhattisgarh. ................ (Applicant No. 3). 4 - Baldev Singh S/o Karam Singh, R/o Purana Bazar, Dallirajhara, Ward No. 16, District- Balod (Chhattisgarh), ..... (Owner), .............. (Non Applicant No. 2). ... Respondent(s) A ANNAJEE RAO Digitally signed by A ANNAJEE RAO 2 For the appellants : Mr. Dashrath Gupta, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : None (Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judgment on Board 17/04/2025 1. This appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “MV Act”) has been filed challenging the award dated 31.07.2018 passed by the learned III Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Durg, District Durg Chhattisgarh, in Claim Case No. 47/2016 whereby the tribunal has granted a total compensation of Rs. 10,72,000/-. 2. As per the pleadings of the claim application filed under Section 166 of the MV Act, on 23.11.2015 at about 11.45 p.m., deceased Irfan Ansari @ Irfan Deshlahare along with pillion rider Dharmu (A.W.2) was going to his house at Maroda Tanki Bhilai from village Chingari. On the way at Konari Bharda Minakshi Rice Mill, the driver of the offending vehicle Truck bearing Regn. No.C.G.04-J-3125 parked it negligently on the road without there being any indicator or security signal. The deceased Irfan hit the truck from behind, as a result of which, he sustained grievous injuries and died on the spot. The pillion rider Dharmulal also sustained injuries. The claimants of deceased being legal heirs filed claim petition under Section 166 of MV Act, 1988 seeking compensation of Rs.28,30,000/- on various heads. 3. The learned tribunal has found contributory negligence in the accident that occurred on 23.11.2015 at around 11.45 p.m. According 3 to the evidence adduced on record, the offending vehicle No. C.G. 04-J/3125 insured by the appellant Insurance Company was negligently parked diagonally on the road without there being any indicator or security signal. Irfan Ansari (deceased) came from behind on a motorcycle and hit the right rear portion of the offending vehicle thereby the accident took place in which he died on the spot. On the basis of the said evidence, the Tribunal has passed the award of Rs. 10,72,000/- finding 70% contributory negligence on the part of the offending truck driver and 30% on the part of deceased motorcyclist Irfan Ansari. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant insurance Company argues that since the deceased himself was driving the motorcycle at a high speed the accident took place and if he had not been negligent, he could have seen the truck from a distance in the light of the motorcycle and could have averted the accident. Therefore, the contributory negligence should be considered 50% - 50%. 5. In this case, from claimant side, wife of the deceased (A.W.1) and Dharmu Ram Tandon (A.W.2) who was sitting as pillion rider on the motorcycle with the deceased have been examined while no witness has been examined from non-applicants’ side. 6. Dharmu Ram Tandon (A.W.2) who was present on the spot as pillion rider of deceased Irfan Ansari has stated that when they were going on motorcycle, the driver of the offending vehicle had negligently parked it diagonally on the road near Meenakshi Rice Mill at night without giving any indicator and further no street light was glowing, therefore, Irfan Ansari could not see the parked truck in the dark night, 4 which caused the accident. In cross examination, he has stated that the street light on the side of the road was also not glowing. He has admitted the suggestion that if the deceased had been driving slowly, he would have stopped the motorcycle after seeing the offending truck and has also stated that his motorcycle hit the rear side of the truck. 7. The tribunal on the basis of the entire evidence has concluded that the motorcycle of deceased was damaged after it hit the the parked offending vehicle from behind on the right side of the truck. The Statement of Dharmu Ram Tandon (A.W.2) that the offending vehicle was parked diagonally on the road by its driver negligently without any indicator has not been contradicted. His statement further stood firm by the inquest report registered with the police (Ex.P-2). 8. In this situation, considering the evidence adduced on record, this Court does not find any illegality or any error in the assessment of 70% contributory negligence of the truck driver and 30% of the deceased motorcyclist, made by the tribunal. Hence, the findings drawn by the Tribunal in the award do not call for any interference. 9. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. The records of the Tribunal be sent back to the Tribunal. Sd/- Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Judge Rao