1 2025:CGHC:58310 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 528 of 2020 1. Suresh Kindo S/o. Ramnath, Aged About 21 Years R/o. Village Askara, P.S. Kamleshwarpur, Tehsil Mainpat, District Surguja Chhattisgarh...............Defendant No. 1, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh 2. Ramnath, S/o Sukhram, Aged About 51 Years R/o. Village Askara, P.S. Kamleshwarpur, Tehsil Mainpat, District Surguja Chhattisgarh................Defendant No. 2, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh ... Appellant(s) versus 1. Sushila Bai W/o. Late Ramnath, Aged About 51 Years R/o. Village Askara, P.S. Kamleshwarpur, Tehsil Mainpat, District Surguja Chhattisgarh.................Plaintiff, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh 2. Rajnath, S/o Late Ramnath, Aged About 31 Years R/o. Village Askara, P.S. Kamleshwarpur, Tehsil Mainpat, District Surguja Chhattisgarh.................Plaintiff, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh 3. Sandeep, S/o Late Ramnath, Aged About 26 Years R/o. Village Askara, P.S. Kamleshwarpur, Tehsil Mainpat, District Surguja Chhattisgarh.................Plaintiff, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh 4. Ashok, S/o Late Ramnath Aged About 14 Years Through His Legal Heir Mother Namely Sushila Bai, W/o. Late Ramnath, Aged About 51 Years, R/o. Village Askara, P.S. Kamleshwarpur, Tehsil Mainpat, District Surguja Chhattisgarh.................Plaintiff, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh 5. Branch Manager, Royal Sundaram General Insurance Company Private Limited, Corporator Of Branch Vishwaranti Melaram Tawan No. 2/319 Rajeev Gandhi Salai O.M.R. Karapakkam, Chennai-060097, Registered Office-21 Palas Road, Chennai-6002 Through Its Branch Manager Royal Sundaram General Insurance Company Private Limited, Rama Trade Centre First Floor Opposite Rajeev Plaza, Near Old Bus Stand, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.............Plaintiff, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Appellantd/driver & owner : Mr. Mayank Gupta, Advocate holding the brief SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Digitally signed by SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Date: 2025.12.03 16:29:27 +0530 2 of Mr. Anurag Singh, Advocate For Respondents No. 1 to 4 : Ms. Ananya Chaterjee, Advocate holding the Claimants brief of Mr. Rishi Rahul Soni, Advocate For Respondent No. 5/ : Mr. Anupam Dubey, Advocate Insurance Company Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 02.12 .2025 1. The appellants/driver and owner of the offending vehicle have filed this appeal assailing the judgment and award passed by the learned 1st Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ambikapur passed in Claim Case No. 89/2018 dated 29.06.2019, whereby the learned Tribunal has granted compensation to the tune of Rs. 5,60,050/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum on account of death of Ramnath and fastened liability with driver and owner of the offending vehicle. 2. Facts in brief are that on 11.11.2017, deceased Ramnath along with one Ramnath Kiddo had gone to Mangrailgarh for excavation of sand and while returning, the Tractor bearing registration No. CG 15 D D 8756 turned turtle near Matighat, resultantly, Ramnath sustained injuries and succumbed to death. The claimants, who are widow and three children filed a claim case under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, wherein they claimed a sum of Rs. 59,90,000/-. The driver & owner of the offending vehicle pleaded that their Tractor Trolley was not involved in the accident and false report was lodged. It was also pleaded that the Tractor was taken back by the Finance Company, as they failed to repay installments of loan. 3. The Insurance Company filed reply and took a plea that the deceased was gratuitous passenger on the Tractor and the driver of the offending vehicle did not have valid and effective driving licence. The learned Tribunal framed issues; parties led evidence, and thereafter, award was passed, whereby the liability was fastened with driver & owner of the offending 3 vehicle to indemnify the award. 4. Mr. Mayank Gupta, Advocate appearing for the appellants would submit that the Tractor of the appellants was not involved in the accident; the driver had valid and effective driving licence on the date of accident and the vehicle was insured with the Insurance company, and therefore, the learned Tribunal committed an error of law while fastening liability with the appellant. He would pray to allow this appeal. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for Insurance company would submit that the deceased was gratuitous passenger and the driver of the offending vehicle did not have valid and effective driving licence on the date of accident. He would contend that the appeal deserves to be dismissed. 6. Ms. Ananya Chatterjee, Advocate would support the contention made by Mr. Dubey. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 8. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Bommithi Subbhayamma and Ors. reported in (2005) 12 SCC 243 has held that Insurance Company is not liable for payment of any compensation for death of a gratuitous passenger travelling in a goods vehicle, para 7 is reproduced herein-below :- “7. In New India Assurance Co. Ltd v. Asha Rani1 this Court while overruling New India Assurance Co. v. Satpal Singh2 has clearly held that the Insurance Company is not liable for payment of any compensation for death of a gratuitous passenger travelling in a goods vehicle.” 9. In the present case, the deceased Ramnath was travelling on Tractor as 1 (2003) 2 SCC 223 : 2003 SCC (Cri) 493 : (2002) 9 Scale 172 2 (2000) 1 SCC 237 : 2000 SCC (Cri) 130 4 gratuitous passenger as there was only seating capacity for driver. An FIR was lodged on 12.11.2017 itself wherein it is stated that the deceased was travelling on the Tractor. The merg-intimation was lodged by one Rajnath Ekka, wherein it is stated that while the deceased was travelling on the Tractor, its driver dorve it rashly and negligently, resultantly, deceased fell down and died. The offending vehicle was seized by police on 23.11.2017 and the driver of offending vehicle was arrested on 23.11.2017, and thereafter, charge-sheet was filed. The driver and owner of the offending vehicle failed to make any complaint before superior police authorities against the registration of FIR and seizure of vehicle. Rajnath (AW/1), Manoj (AW/3) have categorically stated that on the fateful date, the deceased was travelling on the Tractor and he fell down, resultantly, sustained injuries and died. The driver and owner could not rebut the evidence led by these witnesses. As there was breach of Insurance policy, the learned Tribunal rightly fastened liability with the driver and owner. I do not find any good ground to interfere with the award. In result, this appeal fails and is hereby dismissed. 10. Pending applications are hereby disposed of. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge $iddhant