1 2026:CGHC:18120 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 843 of 2020 1 - Manoj Kumar Dahire Son Of Bhagat Ram Dahire Aged About 34 Years Resident Of Ward No. 03, Sadakpara, Pandatarai, Police Station-Pandatarai, Tahsil-Pandaria, District-Kabirdham Chhattisgarh., District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh 2 - Mahant Das Barmate Son Of Laxman Barmate (Dead) Through Legal Heirs-Smt. Milapa Bai Barmate Wife Of Late Mahant Das Barmate, Aged About 42 Years, Resident Of Ward No. 15, Police Station-Pandatarai, Tahsil- Pandaria, District-Kabirdham Chhattisgarh., District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh ... Appellant (s) versus 1 - Smt. Shakun Chandrawanshi Wife Of Late Prakash Chandrawanshi Aged About 42 Years Resident Of Boirkachhra, Police Station- Pandatarai, Tahsil- Bodla, District-Kabirdham Chhattisgarh., District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh 2 - Smt. Sarojani Bai Wife Of Late Prakash Chandrawanshi Aged About 39 Years Resident Of Boirkachhra, Police Station- Pandatarai, Tahsil-Bodla, District-Kabirdham Chhattisgarh., District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh 3 - Ku. Bharti Chandrawanshi Daughter Of Late Prakash Chandrawanshi Aged About 20 Years Resident Of Boirkachhra, Police Station- Pandatarai, Tahsil- Bodla, District-Kabirdham Chhattisgarh., District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh 4 - Holiram Chandrawanshi Son Of Late Prakash Chandrawanshi Aged About 18 Years Resident Of Boirkachhra, Police Station- Pandatarai, Tahsil-Bodla, District-Kabirdham Chhattisgarh., District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh 5 - Smt. Sawana Chandrawanshi Wife Of Tihari Chandrawanshi Aged About 58 KRISHNA KUMAR BARVE Digitally signed by KRISHNA KUMAR BARVE Date: 2026.04.22 19:05:36 +0530 2 Years Resident Of Boirkachhra, Police Station- Pandatarai, Tahsil-Bodla, District-Kabirdham Chhattisgarh., District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh 6 - Tihari Chandrawanshi Son Of Bhikhari Chandrawanshi Aged About 62 Years Resident Of Boirkachhra, Police Station- Pandatarai, Tahsil-Bodla, District-Kabirdham Chhattisgarh., District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh 7 - The Divisional Manager H.D.F.C. Irgo General Insurance Company Limited, Third Floor, Chawla Complex, Devendra Nagar Road, Sai Nagar, Raipur, District-Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Appellant (s) : Mr. Santosh Bharat, Advocate. For Respondent No.7 : Mr. Prashant Sahu, Advocate. (Single Bench) Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 21/04/2026 1. The appellant No.1, who is the owner of the offending vehicle, along with appellant No.2, has preferred this Appeal questioning the finding recorded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kabirdham (henceforth ‘the Claims Tribunal’), in claim case No.78/2018, by which an award has been passed holding that the Insurance Company is not liable, however, principle of pay and recover would apply. 2. Mr. Santosh Bharat, learned counsel for the appellants would submit that finding recorded by the Claims Tribunal at para-13 of the impugned award that the offending vehicle did not have valid and effective permit is incorrect finding and, therefore, the same is liable to be set aside. 3 3. On the other hand, Mr. Prashant Sahu, learned counsel for respondent No.7 would support the impugned award. 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 finding recorded by the Claims Tribunal at para- 13 would show that gross weight of the vehicle was 3225 kg and the vehicle was goods vehicle and, therefore, the said vehicle cannot be exempted from the requirement under Section 66 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which mandates that no owner can use a transport vehicle (goods or passenger) in a public place without a valid permit issued by the State or Regional Transport Authority. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that finding recorded by the Claims Tribunal in this regard is correct finding based on material available on record, and the principle of pay and recover has been rightly applied, in the light of decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Amrit Paul Singh and Another vs. TATA AIG General Insurance Company Limited and others1. 6. I do not find any merit in this Appeal, which deserves to be and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Barve 1 (2018) 7 SCC 558