1 2025:CGHC:51414 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 453 of 2021 1 - Shriram General Insurance Company Limited Through Branch Manager , 2nd Floor , C.G. Plaza, Agrasen Chowk, Near Telephone Exchange Office, Bilaspur , Tehsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Madhuri Markam W/o Late Shri Nagarjun Aged About 23 Years R/o Near Power House, Thana Torwa , Tehsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Indrajit Singh S/o Late Shri Nagarun Aged About 2 Years Minor His Natural Guardian Mother Madhuri Markam, W/o Late Shri Nagarjun, Aged About 23 Years , R/o Near Power House, Thana Torwa , Tehsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Patiram S/o Late Rupram Markam Aged About 56 Years R/o Near Power House, Thana Torwa , Tehsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 4 - Ganeshiya Bai W/o Patiram Markam Aged About 50 Years R/o Near Power House, Thana Torwa , Tehsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 5 - Gokul Prasad Kaushik S/o Chhedilal Aged About 36 Years R/o Mohatara Naya Basti, Mannadol Tifra , Thana Sirgitti, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. (Driver), District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh NIRMALA RAO 2 6 - Bhauprasad S/o Indru R/o Village Keochi, Post Bhaisbod , District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. (Owner) ... Respondent(s) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Appellant : Ms. Santoshi Yadav, Advocate holding the brief of Shri Utsav Mahiswar, Advocate. For Respondents : None though served. Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 15.10.2025 1. The appellant has challenged the award passed by the learned Eighth Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur in Claim Case No.435 of 2019 dated 27.1.2021, whereby the learned Tribunal has passed an award to the tune of Rs.20,43,638/- alongwith interest @6% per annum in favour of the claimants on account of death of Nagarjun Markam. 2. The facts of the present case are that on 26.12.2018, Nagarjun Markam was going towards Bilaspur on his motorcycle bearing registration No.C.G.10 AL 7548, near Bodri turn, driver of the offending vehicle Tractor bearing registration No.C.G. 10 DA 2101, driving rashly and negligently dashed the motorcycle and consequently, Nagarjun Markam sustained injuries and during the course of treatment, he died. 3. The claimants are wife, child and parents of the deceased. They claimed compensation to the tune of Rs.26,49,000/-. The appellant/ Insurance Company filed reply. The learned Tribunal framed issues; the parties led their evidence and thereafter, an award was passed. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the date of accident is 26.12.2018 whereas, the FIR was lodged on 19.3.2019. 3 For the first time, it was stated that the motorcycle of the deceased was hit by the offending vehicle. She would contend that this fact has been stated by the wife of the deceased in her evidence. She would contend that the learned Tribunal failed to consider this aspect and wrongly fastened the liability with the Insurance Company. 5. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the documents present on the record with utmost circumspection. 6. The date of accident is 26.12.2018 and the FIR was lodged on 19.3.2019. Deceased – Nagarjun Markam died during the course of treatment on 7.1.2019. A merg intimation was lodged by Nandkishore Singh on 7.1.2019. In merg intimation, it was stated that the deceased fell from the motorcycle due to dizziness and sustained injuries. In the FIR, the very story has been reiterated. Both Madhuri Markam and Manturam Markam have stated that they were not the eyewitnesses of the accident. The police, however, filed a final report against Gokul Prasad Kaushik, the driver of the Tractor. 7. In the present case, the claimants failed to prove the involvement of the offending motorcycle in the accident. Similarly, the driver-cum-owner of the vehicle as well as the Insurance Company failed to prove the non-involvement of the offending motorcycle in the accident. Even, no investigation was conducted by the Insurance Company. 8. Taking into consideration the above discussed facts, the appeal is allowed and the award passed by the learned Tribunal is hereby set aside. The matter is remitted back to the concerned Tribunal to decide it afresh after affording due opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned. 4 9. The Insurance Company has already deposited 75% of the award amount pursuant to the interim order dated 10.11.2021. The deposit made by the Insurance Company shall be subject to the final outcome of the claim case. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nimmi