1 2025:CGHC:46944 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 196 of 2023 Reliance General Insurance Company Limited Through - Its Legal Manager, Present Address - Shop No. 516, 5th Floor, National Corporate Park, Commercial Complex, Great Eastern Road, Geeta Nagar, Samta Colony Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh … Appellant versus 1 - Pilaram Sahu S/o Late Sonelal Sahu Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Akola, Tahsil Khamhariya, District - Bemetara, Chhattsgarh 2 - Dropati Bai W/o Late Sonelal Sahu Aged About 42 Years R/o Village Akola, Tahsil Khamhariya, District - Bemetara, Chhattsgarh 3 - Devendra Kumar Netam S/o Ramprasad Netam Aged About 22 Years R/o Village Dhanras Tilaihapara, Post Kargikala, Police Station And Tahsil Kota, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh HARNEET KAUR Digitally signed by HARNEET KAUR Date: 2025.09.15 10:52:56 +0530 2 4 - Janakram Gond S/o Dhanauram Gond Aged About 55 Years R/o M.I.G. 55, Pushpvihar Ravishankar Nagar, Korba, District Korba, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Appellant : Mr. Saurabh Gupta, Advocate For Respondents 1 & 2 : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Sahu, Advocate SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment On Board 11.09 .2025 1. Appellant (Insurance Company) has preferred this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter, “the Act of 1988”) calling in question the legality, validity and correctness of impugned award dated 02/12/2022 passed by learned Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bemetara in Claim Case No. 24/2021 whereby compensation of Rs. 7,56,400/- has been granted in favour of respondents No. 1 and 2/claimants for the death of Sonelal Sahu, aged about 55 years, and the liability of payment of compensation has been fastened upon the appellant (Insurance Company). 2. Mr. Saurabh Gupta, learned counsel for the appellant, would submit that the offending vehicle was being plied in 3 breach of terms and conditions of the insurance policy as the driver of the vehicle i.e. respondent No. 3 herein did not have valid driving license on the date of the accident, therefore, the appellant (Insurance Company) ought to have been exonerated from liability of payment of compensation to the claimants. 3. Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Sahu, learned counsel for respondents No. 1 and 2/claimants, would support the impugned award and submit that the instant appeal is liable to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection. 5. A careful perusal of the impugned award would show that learned Claims Tribunal has clearly recorded a finding in paragraph 10 that driving license of driver of the offending vehicle i.e. respondent No. 3 herein namely Devendra Kumar Netam bearing No. CG10-20170000-6374 was never subjected to any examination by the RTO and rather the driving license which has been examined at the instance of the appellant (Insurance Company) bears No. CG10- 2017000-6374 which is issued to one Aditya Sahu S/o Mohanlal Sahu, therefore, it cannot be held that 4 respondent No. 3 herein did not have valid driving license on the date of the accident. 6. In that view of the matter, the finding recorded by learned Claims Tribunal that the appellant (Insurance Company) has failed to prove that the driver i.e. respondent No. 3 herein did not have valid driving license on the date of the accident, is a finding of fact based on evidence available on record, which is neither perverse nor contrary to the record and does not warrant any interference in the impugned award. 7. Accordingly, the instant appeal is liable to be and is hereby dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own cost(s). Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Harneet