1 2025:CGHC:45025 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1485 of 2022 1 - Alok Ekka S/o Manuyel Ekka Aged About 47 Years Caste Uraon, R/o Village Bandhanpur P.S. And Tahsil Pathalgaon District Jashpur Chhattisgarh 2 - Anuranjan Ekka S/o Manuyel Ekka Aged About 45 Years Caste Uraon, R/o Village Bandhanpur P.S. And Tahsil Pathalgaon District Jashpur Chhattisgarh 3 - Ashok Ekka S/o Manuyel Ekka Aged About 45 Years Caste Uraon, R/o Village Bandhanpur P.S. And Tahsil Pathalgaon District Jashpur Chhattisgarh 4 - Anurag Ekka S/o Manuyel Ekka Aged About 45 Years Cast Uraon, R/o Village Bandhanpur P.S. And Tahsil Pathalgaon District Jashpur Chhattisgarh ... Appellants/Claimants versus Branch Managerd I.C.I.Ci. Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd. Ground Floor, Commercial Building Devendranagar Road, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent/Insurer For Appellant :Mr. Shubham Tiwari, Advocate For Respondent :Mr. Suraj Patel on behalf of Mr. Shekhar Rao Amin, Advocates HARNEET KAUR Digitally signed by HARNEET KAUR Date: 2025.09.04 10:44:55 +0530 2 SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment On Board 03.09.2025 1. The appellants/claimants have preferred this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 (hereinafter, “the Act of 1988”) challenging the impugned judgment dated 13/10/2022 passed by learned 2nd Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Ambikapur, (C.G.) in Claim Case No. 186/2021 whereby the claim application filed by the appellants/claimants under Section 166 of the Act of 1988 has been dismissed by the Claims Tribunal on the ground of non-impleadment of owner and driver of the offending vehicle as a party/non-applicant. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the Claims Tribunal has dismissed the claim application of the appellants/claimants solitarily on the ground that owner and driver of the offending vehicle were not made party. The Claims Tribunal could have granted opportunity to the appellants/claimants to file suitable application for impleadment of owner and driver of the offending vehicle, however, without affording them any opportunity, the Claims Tribunal straightway dismissed the claim application, which is unsustainable and bad in law, therefore, the impugned judgment is liable to be set aside 3 and matter be remanded to the Claims Tribunal for hearing and deciding it afresh. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent would support the impugned judgment and submit that the Claims Tribunal has rightly dismissed the claim application filed by the appellants/claimants on the ground of non-impleadment of driver and owner of the offending vehicle, being necessary party, accordingly, the instant appeal is liable to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the record with utmost circumspection. 5. Admittedly and undisputedly, owner and driver of the offending vehicle were necessary parties in the claim application filed by the appellants/claimants under Section 166 of the Act of 1988, however, rather than straightway dismissing the application of the appellants/claimants on this ground, the Claims Tribunal ought to have afforded an opportunity to them to implead the owner and driver as party/non-applicant and after their impleadment, after hearing the parties, final judgment ought to have been passed, which the Claims Tribunal has failed in doing and the said act of the Tribunal is unsustainable and bad in law. Therefore, the impugned judgment is hereby set aside 4 and matter is restored to its original number for hearing and disposal in accordance with law before the Claims Tribunal. The appellants/claimants are at liberty to file suitable application for impleadment of owner and driver of the offending vehicle as party/non-applicant, which will be considered by the Claims Tribunal after hearing the parties, the Tribunal shall decide the claim application by passing a reasoned and speaking judgment afresh. 6. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed to the extent indicated herein-above. No cost(s). 7. A copy of this judgment be sent to the concerned Claims Tribunal for information and compliance. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Harneet