1 MAC No. 840 of 2022 2025:CGHC:51119 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 840 of 2022 1.Jagdish Yadav S/o Dataram, Aged About 50 Years; 2.Smt. Shyam Bai Yadav W/o Jagdish, Aged About 46 Years; Both are R/o Village Badadarha, Post Office Kanvali, Tahsil Dabhara District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh. ... Appellants versus 1.Jitendra Kumar Mahant S/o Rajkumar @ Raju Mahant, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Village Badadarha, Post Office Kanvali, Tahsil Dabhra, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh. 2.Branch Manager, United India Insurance Company Limited, Branch Office - Shanti Palace, Near Sarla Bila, Chakradhar Nagar Raigarh, Tahsil and District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Appellants :- Mr. Deepak Kumar Singh, Advocate. For Respondent No.2 :- Mr. P.R. Patankar, Advocate. ANKIT KUMAR SINGH Digitally signed by ANKIT KUMAR SINGH Date: 2025.10.15 15:39:36 +0530 2 MAC No. 840 of 2022 SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment On Board 14.10.2025 1.This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “Act of 1988”) has been preferred by the appellants/claimants against the impugned award dated 02.05.2022 passed by the 5th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raigarh, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh (for short “Claims Tribunal”) in Claim Case No. 68/2021 whereby learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a sum of 14,49,632/- ₹ as compensation along with interest for death of Ashok Kumar Yadav by fastening the liability upon respondent No.1/owner of the offending vehicle and exonerated the Insurance Company from its liability. 2.Mr. Deepak Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the appellants, would submit that the Claims Tribunal ought to have fastened the liability upon the Insurance Company by applying the principle of pay and recover in light of decision rendered by the Supreme Court in the 3 MAC No. 840 of 2022 matter of National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Swaran Singh and Others 1 . Therefore, the instant appeal deserves to be allowed. 3.Mr. P.R. Patankar, learned counsel for the Insurance Company/respondent No.2, would oppose the submission made by learned counsel for the appellant and submit that the Tribunal is justified in passing the impugned award as the driver of the offending vehicle did not have the valid and effective driving licence at the time of accident and, therefore, the offending vehicle was being plied in terms and conditions of the Insurance Policy. Thus, the instant appeal 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 meticulously. 5.The Claims Tribunal at paragraph No.32 of the impugned award has clearly recorded a finding that the driver did not have the valid and 1 (2004) 3 SCC 297 4 MAC No. 840 of 2022 effective driving licence to drive the offending vehicle and, therefore, the vehicle in question was being plied in terms and conditions of Insurance Policy which is correct finding of fact and based on evidence available on record and I hereby affirm the said finding of the Claims Tribunal. However, in light of decision rendered by the Supreme Court in the matter of Swaran Singh (supra) followed in the matter of Shamanna and another v. Divisional Manager Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. and Others 2 the principle of pay and recover would be applied in the present case. In the matter of Shamanna (supra) their Lordships have held as under:- “7.As per the decision in Swaran Singh case, onus is always upon the insurance company to prove that the driver had no valid driving licence and that there was breach of policy conditions. Where the driver did not possess the valid driving licence and there are breach of policy conditions, “pay and recover” can be ordered in case of third-party risks. The 2 AIR 2018 SC 3726 5 MAC No. 840 of 2022 Tribunal is required to consider “as to whether the owner has taken reasonable care to find out as to whether the driving licence produced by the driver, does not fulfill the requirements of law or not will have to be determined in each case”. 8. The Supreme Court considered the decision of Swaran Singh case in subsequent decision in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Laxmi Narain Dhut 3 , wherein this Court held that “the decision in Swaran Singh case has no application to cases other than third-party risks and in case of third-party risks the insurer has to indemnify the amount and if so advised, to recover the same from the insured.” The same principle was reiterated in Premkumari v. Prahlad Dev and others 4 .” 6.Taking into consideration the principle of law laid down by their Lordships in the aforesaid Judgments, the Insurance Company/respondent No.2 is directed to first pay the compensation amount to the claimants awarded by the Claims Tribunal and thereafter, will be entitled to recover the same from the owner of the offending vehicle. Respondent No.2/Insurance 3 (2007) 3 SCC 700 4 (2008) 3 SCC 193 6 MAC No. 840 of 2022 Company is directed to deposit the said amount within 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 7.In view of the aforesaid discussion and analysis, the instant appeal is partly allowed to the extent indicated herein-above. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Ankit