1 2025:CGHC:52492 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 699 of 2023 1 - United India Insurance Company Limited, Through Its Authorise Authority, Deputy Manager, In-Charge, T. P. Hub, Divisional Office- Ist Floor, LIC Building, Magarpara Road, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh............(Non-Applicant No.3) ... Appellant versus 1 - Dalai Gond, S/o. Late Madho, Aged About 30 Years, R/o. Village Goverdhanpur, Post Office Sulsuli, Police Station Trikunda, Tahsil- Wadrafnagar, District- Balrampur-Ramanujgang, Chhattisgarh.................(Applicant No. 1) 2 - Smt. Rajmuni, W/o. Dalai Gond, Aged About 29 Years, R/o. Village Goverdhanpur, Post Office Sulsuli, Police Station Trikunda, Tahsil- Wadrafnagar, District- Balrampur-Ramanujgang, Chhattisgarh.................(Applicant No. 2) 3 - Satyanarayan @ Chhotu Khairwar, S/o. Jai Singh, Aged About 19 Years, R/o. Village Goverdhanpur, Post Office Sulsuli, Police Station Trikunda, Tahsil Wadrafnagar, District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh.........(Driver).........(Non-Applicant No.1) ASHOK SAHU Digitally signed by ASHOK SAHU Date: 2025.10.29 13:58:35 +0530 2 4 - Ishwar Ram Ayam, S/o. Bandhu Ram Ayam, Aged About 35 Years, R/o. Village Palgi, Police Station Trikunda, Tahsil Ramanujganj, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh...... (Owner)..............(Non-Applicant No.2) ... Respondents For Appellant : Mr. Dashrath Gupta, Advocate For Respondent No.1 : Mr. Arun Kumar Shukla, Advocate For RespondentNo.3 : Mr. Sharda Prasad, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Rahul Mishra, Advocate (Single Bench) Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment on Board 28.10.2025 1. The appellant/insurance company has preferred this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 calling in question the legality, validity and correctness of the impugned award dated 30.01.2023 passed by the learned Second Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ramanujganj, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 01/2021, by which the claim application of the claimants has been allowed and liability has been fastened upon the insurance company to pay the compensation on the ground that the driver Satyanarayan @ Chhotu did not have 3 valid and effective driving licence to drive the offending vehicle. 2. Mr. Dashrath Gupta, learned counsel for appellant/ insurance company, would submit that the driver of the offending vehicle did not have valid and effective driving licence to drive the vehicle, therefore, the finding recorded by the learned Claims Tribunal is perverse, which is liable to be set aside and the insurance company be exonerated from its liability. 3. Mr. Arun Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent No.1 and Mr. Sharda Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.3 would support the impugned award and submit that the liability has rightly been fastened upon the insurance company and, as such, the appeal of the insurance company deserves to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and gone through the records minutely. 5. Learned Claims Tribunal has clearly recorded a finding that though the charge sheet under Section 3/181 & 5/180 of the Motor Vehicles Act has been filed against the driver of the offending vehicle, but merely on the ground that the driver 4 has been charge sheeted for the aforesaid offences, it cannot be held that driver did not have valid driving licence unless it is established that actually he did not have valid and effective driving licence to drive the offending vehicle, as mere filing of the charge sheet would not amount to prove that the driver did not have valid and effective driving licence to drive the vehicle. In that view of the matter, I do not find any merit in this appeal, the same deserves to be and accordingly is dismissed. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Ashok Judge