1 2025:CGHC:51441 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 756 of 2018 1 - Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company Limited Lal Ganga Shopping Mal Complex G.E.Road Raipur, Tehsil And District Raipur, Chhattisgarh (Insurer), District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Smt. Santoshi Tondan W/o Late Shri Narayan Tondan Aged About 36 Years R/o Village Mulle, P.P.Birejar, P.S. Kurud District Dhamtari C/o Pokhraj Sahu House Satapara P.S. Abhanpur District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Kishor Kumar S/o Late Shri Narayan Tondan Aged About 15 Years Minor Through Mother Smt. Santoshi Tandon, R/o Village Mulle, P.P.Birejar, P.S. Kurud District Dhamtari C/o Pokhraj Sahu House Satapara P.S. Abhanpur District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Ku. Priyanka D/o Late Shri Narayan Tondan Aged About 13 Years Minor Through Mother Smt. Santoshi Tandon, R/o Village Mulle, P.P.Birejar, P.S. Kurud District Dhamtari C/o Pokhraj Sahu House Satapara P.S. Abhanpur District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Ku. Vansika D/o Late Shri Narayan Tondan Aged About 5 Years Minor Through Mother Smt. Santoshi Tandon, R/o Village Mulle, ABHIGYA SAXENA Digitally signed by ABHIGYA SAXENA 2 P.P.Birejar, P.S. Kurud District Dhamtari C/o Pokhraj Sahu House Satapara P.S. Abhanpur District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 5 - Smt. Suko Bai W/o Late Dhani Ram Tandon Aged About 60 Years R/o Village Mulle, P.P.Birejar, P.S. Kurud District Dhamtari C/o Pokhraj Sahu House Satapara P.S. Abhanpur District Raipur, Chhattisgarh (Claimants), District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 6 - Anil Kumar Ahuja S/o Ghanshyam Ahuja Aged About 48 Years R/o Patnakar Colony Mohan Nagar P.S. Mohan Nagar District Durg, Chhattisgarh (Driver), District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 7 - Mohd. Aadil Rizvi C/o Afjal Bhai Amin Bhai, Near Nandai Naka Mohar Road Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh (Owner), District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh 8 - Om Prakas S/o Hotumal Vaghvani Lal Bagh Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh, Add. Mohd. Audil Rizvi Near Nandainaka, Mohara Road Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ghanshyam Patel, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 15/10/2025 1. This is an appeal by the appellant-insurance company against the award dated 16.08.2017 passed by the 3rd Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Raipur District Raipur, Chhattisgarh in Claim Case No.42/2016, whereby the Claims Tribunal has granted compensation of Rs.11,61,000/- in favour of the claimants with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of application. 3 2. Facts of the present case, in brevity, are that an application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 was filed by respondents No. 1 to 5 (claimants), being the wife, children, and parents of the deceased Rekhram Chaturvedani, seeking compensation for his death arising out of a motor vehicle accident. As per the case of the claimants, on 28.09.2015, the deceased was travelling on a motorcycle bearing registration No. CG 04 HM 8453 along with his friend as a pillion rider, proceeding from Kurudand toward Abhanpur. When they reached near Kalle turning on NH-30, a Swift car bearing registration No. CG 08 K 0304 allegedly driven in a rash and negligent manner, collided with the motorcycle from behind, causing the deceased to sustain grievous injuries which proved fatal. The deceased, aged about 40 years and earning approximately ₹8,000 per month as a mason, was the sole breadwinner of his family; hence, the claimants sought compensation of ₹30,06,000 under various heads. The driver and owner of the alleged offending vehicle (respondents No. 1 and 2) filed their written statement denying all adverse allegations and asserting that the deceased himself was responsible for the accident. The Insurance Company (present appellant), upon being granted permission under Section 170 of the Act on 05.01.2017, filed its reply denying liability on the grounds that the driver of the insured car did not possess a valid and effective driving licence at the time of the accident and that the deceased himself was driving the motorcycle rashly, lost 4 control, and fell, thereby causing the accident. During trial, PW-2 Arjun Sonwani, an eyewitness, admitted in cross-examination that the accident occurred at a turning point, the deceased was travelling straight without turning, and the motorcycle struck the rear passenger side of the car, clearly indicating that the motorcyclist was at fault. Despite this evidence, the learned Tribunal, without properly appreciating the material on record, drew an adverse inference against the appellant merely because the driver of the car was not examined and consequently held the driver of the car negligent, fastening liability upon the Insurance Company. Further, during trial, the Tribunal examined the evidence, including the deposition of PW-1 Arjun Sonwani, an eyewitness, who stated that the Swift car driven rashly and in an uncontrolled manner overtook him and hit the deceased’s motorcycle, leading to the accident. Although during cross- examination the witness admitted that the accident took place near a turning point and that the motorcycle hit the car from behind, the Tribunal, after appreciating the overall testimony and other evidence on record, found that the car was being driven in a rash and negligent manner and that such rashness was the proximate cause of the accident. The Tribunal further noted that the Insurance Company failed to lead any cogent evidence to establish contributory negligence or to disprove the claimants’ case. 5 3. Having heard learned counsel for both parties and upon perusal of the record, this Court finds that the learned Tribunal has rightly appreciated the oral and documentary evidence and has passed a reasoned award holding the driver of the car negligent and fastening liability upon the appellant–Insurance Company. The finding of the Tribunal is based on a proper evaluation of facts and law, and the admissions of PW-1 do not, by themselves, dislodge the conclusion that the car was being driven rashly at the time of the accident. No material has been brought on record to demonstrate any perversity or illegality in the findings or reasoning adopted by the Tribunal. 4. Accordingly, this Court finds no merit in the appeal filed by the appellant–Insurance Company. The award dated 16.08.2017 passed by the learned 3rd Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) in Claim Case No. 42/2016 is hereby affirmed. 5. Consequently, the appeal stands dismissed. No order as to costs. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Saxena