1 2025:CGHC:16020 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 812 of 2017 The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Through Its Divisional Manager, Divisional Office No. 1, Madina Building, Jail Road, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Represented In This Appeal Through The Sr. Divisional Manager, The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Divisional Officer, 1st Floor, Rama Trade Centre, Near Bus Stand Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus 1 - Om Prakash Yadav S/o Derharam Yadav, Aged About 32 Years R/o Chinwri, Via- Kurud, District- Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. Alternative Address New Laxmi Nagar, Moba, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Khubchand Deewan, S/o Shri Prasad Deewan, Aged About 45 Years R/o Kalmidadar (Basuladabri), Police Station- Bagbahra, District- Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh 3 - Smt. Sampatti Devi Saraf, W/o Shri Pawan Saraf, R/o 3/4 Sahkari Marg, Choubey Colony, Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Appellant : Mr. Akash Shrivastava, Advocate, on behalf of Mr. RN Pusty, Advocate For Respondents 2 & 3 : Mr. Harshmandar Rastogi, Advocate For Respondent No.1 : None Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2025.04.05 11:51:07 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal, J. ORDER ON BOARD (03.04.2025) 1. It is an insurer’s appeal under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act challenging the award dated 04.02.2017 passed by the 2nd Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur (CG) in Claim Case No.56/2013 whereby the Tribunal has awarded total compensation of Rs.4,04,003/- with interest @ 9% per annum, from the date of application till its realization, in favour of the claimant/Respondent No.1 and against the appellant/Insurance Company. 2. The gist of claim before the Tribunal in short is that, on 04.01.2013 around 6:30 PM, at Village Maulimuda, Fulwari Chowk respondent no.2 Khubchand Deewan driving the offending vehicle bearing registration No.CG 04 JC 1295 in a rash and negligent manner and dashed the motorcycle bearing registration No. CG 04 DW 7334 due to which Respondent No.1/Claimant sustained injuries on his face, chest, stomach, head and various parts of his body. The claimants, preferred a claim application before the Tribunal claiming compensation of Rs.44,50,000/-. Learned Tribunal, on a close scrutiny of the evidence brought on record, awarded total compensation of Rs.4,04,003/- in favour of the claimants with interest @ 9% per annum, from the date of application till its realization. While passing the impugned award, the Tribunal has fastened the liability of payment of compensation upon the Insurance Company against which the present appeal has been filed by the Insurance Company to be exonerated from the liability. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant/Insurance Company submits that at the time of accident, the driver/Respondent No. 2 did not have a valid and effective driving licence. Hence, the driving licence brought on record is fake. Despite this, the Tribunal has committed an error in not accepting the breach of policy. Learned 3 counsel for the appellant argues that the liability of the owner does not end merely on the ground of the vehicle being insured, rather he has to prima facie establish that the offending vehicle was being driven by a valid and effective license holder, in which the registered owner has failed. Hence, there is a clear breach of policy condition and the insurance company cannot be held liable for payment of compensation. Therefore, by accepting the appeal, the Insurance Company should be exonerated from the liability. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for Respondents No.2 & 3 submits that the owner had appointed Respondent No.2 as a driver after seeing his driving license and taking due care on his part, therefore, the insurance conditions have not been violated and the insurance company is liable for payment of compensation. Hence, prays for dismissal of the appeal. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6. The contention of learned Counsel appearing for the appellant/insurance company is that there was a breach of insurance policy as at the time of accident, the driver has not possessed any valid and effective driving license. In this regard, Suresh Agarwal (NA W-1) examined before the Tribunal and stated that he has been posted as the Regional Transport Officer at the Regional Transport Office, Raipur, since 10.12.2015. During cross- examination, the witness admitted that the said driving license of the license holder has not been declared invalid by his office. Furthermore, he admitted that a new license number, CG- 04/1996/0038475, was issued in the name of the license holder, Khubchand. He also admitted that, according to the details in Ex. D- 1, Khubchand had a valid and effective driving license to operate a Light Motor Vehicle on 04.01.2013. 7. As per the statement of the above witness, the Claims Tribunal has held that the appellant/insurance company has failed to refute the certified facts. This above witness’s testimony establishes that on 4 the date of the accident, 04.01.2013, the driver of the offending vehicle/ Respondent No. 2 held a valid and effective driving license for operating a non-transport vehicle. 8. Learned Tribunal has discussed this issue in detail in paragraphs 17 of its award and reached to the conclusion that the insurance company has failed to prove the breach of policy condition. In the light of the above, this Court does not find any error or illegality in the said conclusion of the Tribunal regarding liability. 9. Accordingly, the appeal preferred by the Insurance Company being devoid of merit is hereby dismissed. 10. Records of the Tribunal along with a copy of this order be sent back forthwith for compliance and necessary action, if any. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) JUDGE Shubham