1 MAC No. 193 of 2022 2025:CGHC:49857 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 193 of 2022  The Divisional Manager Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Geetanjali Bhawan, Old Bus Stand, Main Road Korba District Korba, Chhattisgarh, Through T.P. Hub Divisional Office, Oriental Insurance Company Limited, First Floor Rama Trade Centre Opposite Rajeev Plaza Old Bus Stand Road Tahsil And District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. (Insurance Company) ... Appellant versus 1.Smt. Amritbai Chandra Wd/o Late Chaitram Chandra, Aged About 42 Years; 2.Sevakram Chandra S/o Late Chaitram Chandra, Aged About 22 Years; 3.Reena Chandra D/o Late Chaitram Chandra, Aged About 16 Years; 4.Hemlal Chandra S/o Late Chaitram Chandra, Aged About 12 Years; Respondents No.3 & 4 are minors through Legal Guardian Mother (Res. No. 1) ANKIT KUMAR SINGH Digitally signed by ANKIT KUMAR SINGH Date: 2025.10.10 10:54:29 +0530 2 MAC No. 193 of 2022 5.Smt. Heera Bai Wd/o Late Sukhruram Chandra, Aged About 65 Years; All are Residence At Village Datoud Police Station and Tahsil Jaijaipur, District Janjgir- Champa, Chhattisgarh (Claimants). 6.Narendra Kashyap S/o Shivdayal Kashyap, Aged About 28 Years; (Driver) 7.Gangaram Shrivash S/o Foolchand Shrivash (Owner) Respondents No.6 & 7 are R/o Village Kosmunda, Police Station and Tahsil Champa, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Appellant :- Mr. P.K. Tulsyan, Advocate. For Respondents :- None SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment On Board 07.10.2025 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 17.08.2021 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh (for short “Claims Tribunal”) in Claim Case No. 20/2020, whereby learned Claims Tribunal has allowed the claimants’ application and awarded 3 MAC No. 193 of 2022 a total sum of 9,47,500/- ₹ as compensation along with interest by fastening the liability upon the appellant herein. 2.Mr. 2.Mr. P.K. Tulsyan, learned counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company, would submit that the Claims Tribunal has erred in fastening the liability upon the Insurance Company to pay the compensation amount to the claimants as the offending vehicle is insured as a private car and it was being used as commercial vehicle for carrying the students and also the driver of the offending vehicle did not have the valid license to drive the commercial vehicle as he has license to drive light motor vehicle and did not have the license to drive light transport vehicle and, therefore, the vehicle was being plied in breach of terms and condition of the insurance policy. As such, the Insurance Company is not liable to pay the amount of compensation. 3.None for the respondent though served. 4 MAC No. 193 of 2022 4.I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein- above and gone through the records meticulously. 5.It is the case of the appellant/Insurance Company that the offending vehicle bearing Registration No. CG – 11 – MB – 4819 (private car) was being used for carrying students, however, C.P. Dhrikar (NAW-1), officer of the Insurance Company, is not an eye witness and no other evidence has been brought on record by the appellant to prove the said plea. Furthermore, in support of its plea that the driver did not have a valid and effective driving license to drive the commercial vehicle, no evidence has been led by the Insurance Company. As such, in absence of evidence, the Claims Tribunal has rightly held that Insurance Company has failed to prove its plea that the vehicle was being used as a commercial vehicle and the driver did not have the valid license to drive the said vehicle 5 MAC No. 193 of 2022 and, therefore, the offending vehicle was being plied in breach of terms and condition of the insurance policy, which is a correct finding of fact based upon evidence available on record and the same is neither perverse nor contrary to the record and accordingly, I hereby affirm the said finding of the Claims Tribunal. 6.In view of the above, I do not find any merit in the instant case, consequently, the appeal is dismissed. No order as to cost(s). Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Ankit