1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 342 of 2024 1 - Shiv Vijay Singh S/o Shri Bramhadev Singh, Aged About 52 Years R/o Shyam Nagar, Raipur, Police Station-Telibandha, Tahsil- Rajnandgaon, District-Rajnandgaon (Cg) --- appellant versus 1 - Smt. Savita Rangari W/o Late Vimal Rangari, Aged About 23 Years R/o Village-Bendarkatta, Post-Khujji, Tahsil Dongargaon, District-Rajnandgaon (C.G.) Claimants 2 - Vinay Rangari S/o Late Ashok Rangari, Aged About 30 Years R/o Village- Bendarkatta, Post-Khujji, Tahsil Dongargaon, District-Rajnandgaon (C.G.) Claimant 3 - Ayush Singh S/o Elish Singh, Aged About 20 Years R/o Shyam Nagar, Ward No. 03, Qt. No. 20/202, Raipur, Tahsil And District- Raipur (C.G.) Driver/non-Applicant No.1 --- Respondent(s) MAC No. 337 of 2024 1 - Shiv Vijay Singh S/o Shri Bramhadev Singh, Aged About 52 Years R/o Shyam Nagar, Raipur, Police Station - Telibandha, Tahsil - Rajnandgaon, District - Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ( Owner ) ---appellant Versus 1 - Smt. Savita Rangari W/o Late Vimal Rangari, Aged About 23 Years R/o Village - Bendarkatta, Post - Khujji, Tahsil - Dongargaon, District - Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ( Claimant ) 2 - Vinay Rangari S/o Late Ashok Rangari, Aged About 30 Years R/o Village - Bendarkatta, Post - Khujji, Tahsil - Dongargaon, District - Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ( Claimant ) 2 3 - Ayush Singh S/o Elish Singh Aged About 20 Years R/o Shyam Nagar, Ward No. 03, Qt. No. 20/ 282, Raipur, Tahsil And District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ( Driver ) ... Respondents For Appellants : Mr. Utkarsh Patel, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. P.K. Patel,Adv. For respondents/claimants : Mr. Rajendra Patel, Adv. Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment on Board 03.11.2025 1. Heard. 2. The owner of the offending vehicle has filed these appeals against award passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.), in Claim Case No.164/2021 & 165/2021 dated 16.01.2024 whereby, the learned Tribunal has passed award to the tune of Rs.12,74,224/- with interest @ 6% per annum on account of death of Vimal Rangari and Rs.9,77,328/- with interest @ 6% per annum on account of death of Tara Rangari. 3. The brief facts are that on 18.10.2020 at about 3:00 p.m., Vimal Rangari and his mother Tara Rangari were going to Village Bendarkatta on Scooty Jupiter bearing registration No.C.G.11/AL/7732. Near village Ghorda, driver of the offending vehicle Tata Magic bearing registration No.C.G./04/MP/8421 driving it rashly and negligently dashed the Scooty, consequently, they sustained injuries and succumbed to death. The claimants filed two separate claim applications and claimed compensation to the tune of Rs.50,62,000/- on account of death of Vimal Rangari and Rs.33,10,000/- on account of death of Tara Rangari. The driver and owner filed their reply and denied the averments made in the claim applications. 3 4. Learned Tribunal framed issues and thereafter, awards were passed. Learned Tribunal passed awards and fastened liability with the driver and owner as the offending vehicle was not insured. 5. Mr. Patel, learned counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that the date of accident is 18.10.2020 and an FIR was lodged on same date against the Tata Magic vehicle bearing registration No.C.G./04/MP/8221. He would contend that the learned Tribunal committed error of law while fastening liability with the owner and driver of the Magic bearing registration No.C.G./04/MP/8421. He would further contend that the claimants failed to establish the fact that the vehicle registered in the name of the appellant was involved in the accident. He would pray to set aside the awards passed by the learned Tribunal in both claim cases. 6. On the other hand, Mr. Rajendra Patel, learned counsel appearing for the claimants would oppose the submissions made by Mr. Patel. He would submit that the offending vehicle bearing registration No.C.G./04/MP/8421 was seized by the police on 19.10.2020. He would contend that due to mistake, instead of registration No.C.G./04/MP/8421, FIR was lodged against the Tata Magic bearing registration No.C.G./04/MP/8221. He would further contend that the learned Tribunal has discussed this issue at length. He would submit that the learned Tribunal has passed just and proper compensation. He would pray to dismiss both appeals. 7. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the records of both cases with utmost circumspection. 8. On 18.10.2020, an FIR was lodged by Anand Kumar Khandelwal against the driver of the offending vehicle No.C.G./04/MP/8221 but he 4 was not an eyewitness. In the morgue intimation vide Ex.P/3, the registered number of the offending vehicle is mentioned as C.G./04/MP/8421. The registered number of the offending vehicle No.C.G./04/MP/8421 was seized by the police on 19.10.2020 vide Ex.P/11 and registration certificate etc. were seized by the police vide Ex.P/12 on 21.10.2020. The appellant herein did not make complaint before superior police authorities against seizure of vehicle and preparation of documents Ex.P/11 and P/12. 9. Vinay Rangari, younger brother of the deceased in his evidence has categorically stated that the offending vehicle No.C.G./04/MP/8421 was involved in the accident. In his cross-examination, this witness remained firm. 10. The appellant was examined as NAW2 and in his cross-examination, he has admitted the fact that he was present at the time of seizure of his vehicle and he never made complaint against the action of the police authorities. 11. Taking into consideration the documents placed on record by the claimants and findings recorded by the learned Tribunal, I do not find any good ground to interfere with the awards passed by the learned Tribunal. Accordingly, both appeals fail and are hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Rekha