1 2025:CGHC:43794 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1350 of 2022 Tata A.I.G. General Insurance Company Limited Through - Its Legal Manager, Present Address - Office No. 403, 4th Floor, Db, City Corporate Park, Flat No. 1, Block No. 9, Rajbandha Maidan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. (Insurer) ... Appellant versus 1 - Jhamin Bai Sinha W/o Late Bhagwat Sinha Aged About 33 Years R/o Village Bawamohtara, Tahsil And District - Bemetara, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Omprakash S/o Late Bhagwat Sinha Aged About 16 Years Minor Represented Through Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Jhamin Bai Sinha/ Respondent No. 1, R/o Village Bawamohtara, Tahsil And District - Bemetara, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Umesh Kumar S/o Late Bhagwat Sinha Aged About 14 Years Minor Represented Through Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Jhamin Bai Sinha/ Respondent No. 1, R/o Village Bawamohtara, Tahsil And District - Bemetara, Chhattisgarh. 2 4 - Nikesh Kumar S/o Late Bhagwat Sinha Aged About 12 Years Minor Represented Through Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Jhamin Bai Sinha/ Respondent No. 1, R/o Village Bawamohtara, Tahsil And District - Bemetara, Chhattisgarh. (Claimants) 5 - Hiralal Koshley S/o Ramkumar Koshley Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Navagaon (Khundmundi), Tahsil And District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh. (Owner-Cum-Driver) ... Respondents For Appellant : Mr. Sourabh Sharma, Advocate For Respondents 1 - 4 : Mr. Veer Verma, Advocate For Respondent 5 : Mr. Ankush Borkar, Advocate SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment On Board 28.08.2025 1. The appellant (Insurance Company) has preferred this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 (hereinafter, “the Act of 1988”) challenging the impugned award dated 02/08/2022 passed by learned Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Bemetara, District Bemetara (C.G.) in Claim Case No. 117/2019 whereby the Claims Tribunal has awarded Rs. 10,06,000/- in favour of respondents No. 1 to 4/claimants and the appellant (Insurance Company) has been directed to firstly pay the 3 compensation amount to the claimants and thereafter, recover it from respondent No. 5 i.e. owner and driver of the offending motorcycle. 2. Brief facts relevant for the disposal of this appeal are that on 12/02/2019 at about 7 PM, deceased Bhagwat Sinha was going to his house from the field and on the way, a Motorcycle bearing Registration No. CG 25/D/9954, which was being driven by respondent No. 5 in a rash and negligent manner, dashed him due to which, he suffered greivous injuries and he was taken to Government Hospital, Bemetara wherein he was declared dead. 3. Learned Claims Tribunal, after appreciation of oral and documentary evidence on record, held that on account of rash and negligent driving of respondent No. 5, the accident occurred in which Bhagwat Sinha suffered grievous injuries and died. The breach of terms and conditions of insurance policy was found proved and accordingly, appellant (Insurance Company) was exonerated from the liability of payment of compensation, however, the Claims Tribunal proceeded to award compensation of Rs. 10,06,000/- in favour of the claimants and directed the appellant (Insurance Company) to pay and recover. 4 4. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the Claims Tribunal has committed grave legal error in rejecting the application filed by the appellant (Insurance Company) for getting their witnesses examined and for taking documents with respect to investigator’s report on record by order dated 14/12/2021 and only one witness was examined on 24/01/2021 and thereafter, their opportunity to lead evidence was closed by the Claims Tribunal and no further opportunity was granted to them, therefore, the impugned award is liable to be set aside as the Claims Tribunal has also erred in directing the appellant (Insurance Company) to pay the compensation to the claimants and thereafter, recover it from owner and driver of the offending motorcycle i.e. respondent No. 5 herein. 5. Learned counsel for respondents No. 1 to 4/claimants would support the impugned award and submit that the Claims Tribunal has granted just and fair compensation, therefore, the instant appel is liable to be dismissed. 6. Learned counsel for respondent No. 5 would submit that the Claims Tribunal has erred in holding that the offending motorcycle was being plied in breach of terms and conditions of insurance policy. 5 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the record with utmost circumspection. 8. A careful perusal of the order dated 14/12/2021 would show that the application filed by the appellant (Insurance Company) herein under Order 8 Rule 1 sub-rule 3(a) of the CPC has been rejected by the Claims Tribunal as it has not been supported by certificate under Section 65B of the Evidence Act, which is absolutely in accordance with law. Thereafter, on 18/01/2022, 08/03/2022, 26/03/2022, matter was fixed for recording evidence of the appellant (Insurance Company) but on 02/04/2022, the Insurance Company itself expressed that they do not want to lead further evidence, therefore, the Claims Tribunal closed their opportunity of leading evidence and fixed the matter for final argument. As such, it appears from the record that sufficient opportunity was granted to the appellant (Insurance Company) to lead evidence and upon their own declaration, their opportunity to lead evidence was closed and the matter was fixed for final argument, therefore, the plea of reasonable opportunity to lead evidence cannot be accepted by this Court. As such, I do not find any merit in this appeal. 6 9. Accordingly, this appeal, being devoid of merits, is liable to be and is hereby dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own cost(s). Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Harneet