1 2025:CGHC:52654 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 741 of 2022 Branch Manager The Oriental Insurance Company Limited Jagdalpur, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus 1 - Son Singh S/o Sudnu Aged About 44 Years R/o Gram Khaaspara Nayanaar, Tehsil Keshkal, District Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh 2 - Smt. Maalti W/o Son Singh Aged About 43 Years R/o Gram Khaaspara Nayanaar, Tehsil Keshkal, District Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh 3 - Smt. Biranti Netaam W/o Late Satauram Aged About 22 Years R/o Gram Khaaspara Nayanaar, Tehsil Keshkal, District Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh 4 - Amit Kumar Baghel S/o Late Seturam Baghel (Death) Through Lrs. Smt. Mohani Baghel W/o Late Setuchand Baghel, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Gram Gulabapara Singanpur, Thana Keshkal District Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh (Driver Of Motor Cycle C.G. 19. B.A. 8231) 5 - Mukesh Kemaro S/o Meghnath Kemaro Aged About 21 Years R/o Gram Gulbapara Singanpur, Thana Keshkal District HARNEET KAUR Digitally signed by HARNEET KAUR Date: 2025.10.29 16:54:24 +0530 2 Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh (Owner Of Motor Cycle C.G. 19. B.A. 8231) ... Respondent(s) For Appellant :Mr. Deepak Gupta, Advocate For Respondents No. 4 & 5 :Mr. Praveen Dhurandhar, Advocate SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment On Board 29.10.2025 1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “Act of 1988”) has been preferred by the appellant (Insurance Company) challenging the impugned award dated 15/12/2021 passed by learned Upper Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kondagaon in Claim Case No. 81/2019, whereby learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs. 16,07,574/- as compensation in favour of respondents No. 1 to 3/claimants for the death of Shatauram and the liability of payment of compensation has been fastened upon the appellant (Insurance Company). 2. Learned counsel for the appellant (Insurance Company) would submit that there was contributory negligence on the part of the deceased Shatauram while driving his 3 motorcycle, therefore, half of the compensation ought to have been deducted by the Claims Tribunal towards contributory negligence. 3. Learned counsel for respondents No. 4 and 5 would support the impugned award and submit that the compensation awarded by learned Claims Tribunal is just and proper and does not warrant any interference by this Court. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection. 5. A careful perusal of the record would show that Kamlesh Mandavi (A.W.-2) was sitting as a pillion rider on the motorcycle of deceased Shatauram and he, being an eye witness, has clearly stated that Amit Kumar Baghel, while driving his motorcycle bearing Registration No. CG 19 BA 8231, came from the wrong direction and dashed the motorcycle driven by the deceased and in cross- examination, Kamlesh Mandavi (A.W.-2) has maintained that deceased was not contributorily negligent and the accident occurred on account of the rash and negligent act of Amit Kumar Baghel. Furthermore, the appellant (Insurance Company) though have pleaded before the Claims Tribunal that there was contributory negligence on 4 the part of the deceased, but they have not led any evidence in this regard to prove the said fact. In that view of the matter, I do not find any merit in this appeal. 6. 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