1 (MAC No. 1199 of 2022) 2025:CGHC:39171 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1199 of 2022 1 - Chola Mandlam Ms General Insurance Company Limited Through 2nd Floor, Simran Tower Opposite Lic Building Pandri Raipur District- Raipur Chhattisgarh. 492001, Branch Office Near Honda Show Room Gamhria Road Jashpur District- Jashpur Chhattisgarh. ........Insurer --- Appellant(s) versus 1 - Smt. Anjela Tirkey W/o Late Sudhir Tirkey Aged About 33 Years R/o Village Gadhatoli Jakba, Post Lokhandi, Tehsil And District- Jashpur Chhattisgarh. .......Claimants. 2 - Minor Animala Tirkey D/o Late Sudhir Tirkey Aged About 16 Years Minor Through Mother Smt. Anjela Tirkey, R/o Village Gadhatoli Jakba, Post Lokhandi, Tehsil And District- Jashpur Chhattisgarh. 3 - Minor Anish Tirkey S/o Late Sudhir Tirkey Aged About 14 Years Minor Through Mother Smt. Anjela Tirkey, R/o Village Gadhatoli Jakba, Post Lokhandi, Tehsil And District- Jashpur Chhattisgarh. 4 - Minor Vijay Tirkey S/o Late Sudhir Tirkey Aged About 12 Years Minor Through Mother Smt. Anjela Tirkey, R/o Village Gadhatoli Jakba, Post Lokhandi, Tehsil And District- Jashpur Chhattisgarh. 5 - Minor Alex Tirkey S/o Late Shri Sudhir Tirkey Aged About 10 Years Minor Through Mother Smt. Anjela Tirkey, R/o Village Gadhatoli Jakba, Post Lokhandi, Tehsil And District- Jashpur Chhattisgarh. 6 - Inocent Tirkey S/o Ilisyus Tirkey Aged About 29 Years ADITI DIWAN KAIWART Digitally signed by ADITI DIWAN KAIWART Date: 2025.08.11 10:27:07 +0530 2 (MAC No. 1199 of 2022) Residing At Gholeng, Tehsil Jashpur District- Jashpur Chhattisgarh. .........Owner Vehicle No. C. G. 14 Mko105. 7 - Subhash Tirkey S/o Vinod Tirkey Aged About 29 Years Residing At Ghantotoli Jhargoan Tehsil Jashpur District- Jashpur Chhattisgarh. ............Driver Vehicle No. C. G. 14 Mk0105 --- Respondent(s) For Appellant :- Ms. Srishti Upadhyay, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Ghanshyam Patel, Advocate For Respondent :- None though served. SB - Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment On Board 06.08.2025 1. Heard on application for condonation of delay in filing this appeal. 2. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed and the delay of 255 days caused in filing the instant appeal is hereby condoned. 3. Also heard on admission. 4. The appellant-insurance company has preferred this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “Act of 1988”) calling in question the legality, validity and correctness of impugned award dated 02.11.2021 (Annexure A/1) passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jashpur, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh, by which the insurance company has been 3 (MAC No. 1199 of 2022) directed to pay the amount of compensation to the claimants and recover it from the owner and driver of the offending vehicle. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that at the time of accident the deceased was traveling as a passenger in a tractor attached with the trolley and the risk of passenger traveling in a tractor is not covered under the insurance policy. She would further submit that the driver of the offending vehicle did not have valid and effective driving license at the time of incident and therefore, the insurance company be completely exonerated from paying the amount of compensation. 6. None for the respondents though served. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the material available on records with utmost circumspection. 8. Learned Claims Tribunal has categorically recorded a finding that on the date of accident, driver - Subhash Tirkey did not have valid and effective driving license to drive the offending vehicle, therefore, in light of the decision of the Supreme Court in the matter of National Insurance Company vs Swaran Singh 1 , directed the 1 (2004) 3 SCC 297 4 (MAC No. 1199 of 2022) appellant-insurance company to pay the amount of compensation to the claimants and recover it from the owner and driver of the offending vehicle, which in my considered opinion, is a correct finding of facts based on the materials available on record and the same is neither perverse nor contrary to the record. As such, I do not find any good ground to entertain the instant appeal. 9. Accordingly, this appeal deserves to be and is accordingly, dismissed, at admission stage, being devoid of merit. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge @d!t!