1 MAC No. 767 of 2022 2025:CGHC:56977 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 767 of 2022 1.Arjun Nishad S/o Punau Nishad, Aged About 42 Years, 2.Dharmendra Nishad S/o Arjun Nishad, Aged About 19 Years; 3.Narendra Nishad S/o Arjun Nishad, Aged About 16 Yearsv (minor) Through Natural Guardian Father Arjun Nishad Son Of Punau Nishad, R/o Village Sukharikala, Police Station Bori, District Durg Chhattisgarh. ... Appellants/claimants versus 1.Lomesh Sahu S/o Biju Ram Sahu, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Village Kopedih, Police Station Somani, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) (Driver) And Owner Of The Offending Vehicle Cg-07, B.S. - 3643). 2.Shriram General Insurance Limited, 40 Floor, Maruti Hights, G.E. Road Behind R.K. Mal, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh (Insurer) ... Respondents For Appellants :-Mr. Praveen Dhurandhar, Advocate. For Respondent No.1:-Mr. C.R. Sahu, Advocate. For Respondent No.3:-Ms. Harneet Kaur, Advocate. ANKIT KUMAR SINGH Digitally signed by ANKIT KUMAR SINGH Date: 2025.11.25 15:05:33 +0530 2 MAC No. 767 of 2022 SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment On Board 24.11.2025 1.This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “Act of 1988”) has been preferred by the appellant/claimant seeking challenging the impugned award dated 02.05.2022 passed by the 8th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Durg, (for short “Claims Tribunal”) in Claim Case No. 272/2019, whereby learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of 11,60,000/- ₹ as compensation along with interest by fastening the liability upon the owner & driver/respondent No.1 herein and exonerated the Insurance Company/respondent No.2 herein from its liability to pay the compensation amount. 2.Mr. Praveen Dhurandhar, learned counsel for the appellants/claimants, would submit that the Claims Tribunal ought to have applied the principle of pay and recover would be applied in light of decision of the Supreme Court in the matter of National Insurance Company Ltd. v. 3 MAC No. 767 of 2022 Swaran Singh and Others 1 by fastening the liability upon the Insurance Company. 3.Mr. C.R. Sahu, learned counsel for respondent No.1, would submit that driver and owner are not liable to pay the compensation. 4.Ms. Harneet Kaur, learned counsel for the Insurance Company, would oppose the prayer made by learned counsel for the appellants and support the impugned award. She would also submit that the impugned award passed by the Claims Tribunal is just and proper which does not call for any interference. 5.I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein- above and gone through the records precisely. 6.The Claims Tribunal has clearly recorded a finding that vehicle was being plied in breach of terms and conditions of the insurance policy as the driver did not have the valid and effective driving license to drive the offending vehicle and, therefore, the Claims Tribunal has exonerated the Insurance Company from its 1 (2004) 3 SCC 297 4 MAC No. 767 of 2022 liability. However, in light of decision of the Supreme Court in the matter of Swaran Singh (supra) the principle of pay and recover would be applied in the instant case. Accordingly, the Insurance Company/respondent No.2 is directed to first pay the compensation amount as awarded by the Claims Tribunal to the claimants/appellants and then recover the same from the owner & driver/respondent No.1 herein. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. 7.In view of the above, the instant appeal stands disposed off. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Ankit