1 2025:CGHC:53990 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1971 of 2018 1 - Shriram Insurance Company Limited Firs Floor, Gurukripa Complex, Icici Bank Vyapar Vihar, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. (Insurer Of Auto No. C.G. 28/b/3916), District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ...Appellants versus 1 - Saraswati Bai W/o Late Amardas Aged About 38 Years Caste Satnami, R/o Village - Bodhipara, Thana Chouki Fasterpur, Tahsil And District Mungeli Chhattisgarh., District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh 2 - Sohagchand S/o Late Amardas Aged About 22 Years The Associated Cement Companies Limited, Registered Under Indian Companies Act With The Registrar Of Companies, Bombay, Registered Office At Cement House 121, Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai - 20 Carrying On Manufacture Of Cement In The Name Of Jamul Cement Works At Jamul, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh. Through Its Vice President I.M. Sharma., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 3 - Ramprasad S/o Amardas Aged About 19 Years Caste Satnami, R/o Village - Bodhipara, Thana Chouki Fasterpur, Tahsil And District Mungeli Chhattisgarh., District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh VISHAKHA BEOHAR Digitally signed by VISHAKHA BEOHAR 2 4 - Devprasad S/o Amardas Aged About 20 Years Caste Satnami, R/o Village - Bodhipara, Thana Chouki Fasterpur, Tahsil And District Mungeli Chhattisgarh., District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh 5 - Ku. Safura D/o Amardas Aged About 18 Years Caste Satnami, R/o Village - Bodhipara, Thana Chouki Fasterpur, Tahsil And District Mungeli Chhattisgarh., District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh 6 - Ku. Anjali D/o Late Amardas Aged About 10 Years (Minor) Represented Through Her Natural Guardian Mother Saraswati Bai, W/o Late Amardas, Aged About 38 Years, Caste Satnami, R/o Village - Bodhipara, Thana Chouki Fasterpur, Tahsil And District Mungeli Chhattisgarh., District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh 7 - Kuwaru Barle S/o Late Dhansingh Barle Aged About 65 Years Caste Satnami, R/o Village - Bodhipara, Thana Chouki Fasterpur, Tahsil And District Mungeli Chhattisgarh., District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh 8 - Agasiya Bai W/o Kuwaru Barle Aged About 60 Years Caste Satnami, R/o Village - Bodhipara, Thana Chouki Fasterpur, Tahsil And District Mungeli Chhattisgarh. (Claimants), District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh 9 - Vinod Singh Thakur S/o Top Singh Thakur Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Chamari, Chouki Fasterpur, Tahsil And District Mungeli Chhattisgarh. (Driver Of Auto No. C.G. - 28/b/3916)., District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh 10 - Sanjay Singh Thakur S/o Top Singh R/o Village Chamari, Chouki Fasterpur, Tahsil And District Mungeli Chhattisgarh. (Owner Of Auto No. C.G. 28/b/3916), District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from the Case Information System) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3 For Appellant :- Ms. Santoshi Yadav, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Utsav Maheswar, Advocate For Respondents :- None. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order On Board 04.11.2025 1. This appeal is by the Insurance Company against the award 30.07.2018 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mungeli, District Mungeli, C.G. in Claim Case No.60/2016, awarding total compensation of Rs.7,90,000/- with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of application till realization while fastening liability on the non-applicant Nos. 1 to 3 jointly and severely. 2. As per averments made in the claim petition, on 09.11.2015, deceased- Amardas, aged about 40 years, earning Rs.400-500/- per day by working as Mason, died in the motor vehicular accident caused due to rash and negligent driving of Auto bearing registration No.CG28-B-3916 (hereinafter called as ‘offending vehicle’) by its driver (non-applicant No.1). At the time of accident, the offending vehicle was owned by non-applicant No.2 and insured with non- applicant No.3/Insurance Company. 3. On claim petition being filed by the claimants under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act seeking compensation to the tune of Rs.14,50,000/-, the Tribunal considering the evidence led by both the parties passed an award as mentioned in para 1 of this judgment. 4 4. Learned counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company submits that the learned Tribunal has erred in fastening the liability upon the appellant/Insurance Company. It is contended that there was a clear breach of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy, inasmuch as the offending vehicle was being driven by a person/non-applicant No.1 who did not possess a valid and effective driving licence at the time of the accident. Hence, it is prayed that the appellant/Insurance Company be exonerated from its liability. 5. None appears on behalf of the respondents. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the record. 7. From a perusal of the record, it appears that although the Insurance Company has disputed the validity of the driver’s licence, but it has failed to adduce any cogent or reliable evidence in support of its contention. There is nothing on record to establish that the driver of the offending vehicle/non-applicant did not possess an appropriate and valid driving licence at the time of the accident. 8. In view of the above, I do not find any ground to interfere with the award passed by the learned Tribunal. 9. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the Insurance Company being without any substance is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Vishakha