1 2026:CGHC:4981 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 311 of 2022  Trilochan Singh Saluja S/o Late Niranjan Singh Saluja Aged About 60 Years R/o Bahadurganj Ward Kawardha, Tahsil Kawardha, District- Kabirdham (Chhattisgarh), District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh --- Appellant versus 1. Shatruhan S/o Puranchand Rana, Aged About 50 Years Driver Of Hvya Truck No. C.G.-10-E.R.-8001, R/o Kodwa, Police Station And Tahsil Sahaslohara, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh, District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh 2. Janrail Singh Virdi S/o Jaswant Singh Virdi, R/o T.P. Nagar, Parsada, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 3. Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Through Divisional Manager, Branch Office, Beside L.I.C. Office, Railway Station, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) MAC No. 328 of 2022 1. Trilochan Singh Saluja S/o Late Niranjan Singh Saluja, Aged About 60 Years R/o Bahadurganj Ward Kawardha, Tahsil- Kawardha, District- Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh, District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh 2. Guljeet Kaur Chhabda W/o Arvind Singh Aged About 30 Years R/o Dhamtari, Police Station, Tahsil And District- Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh, District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh ---Appellant(s) Versus 1. Shatruhan S/o Puranchand Rana Aged About 50 Years Driver Of Hvya Truck No. C.G.-10-Er-8001, R/o Kordwa, Police Station And Tahsil- Sahaslohara, District- Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh, District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh 2. Janrail Singh Virdi S/o Jaswant Singh Virdi R/o T.P. Nagar, Parsada, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 3. Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Through Divisional Manager, Branch SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Digitally signed by SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Date: 2026.01.31 14:53:56 +0530 2 Office, Beside L.I.C. Office, Railway Station- Rajnandgaon, District- Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh 4. Smt. Satpal Kaur W/o Trilochan Singh Saluja Aged About 56 Years R/o Bahadurganj Ward Kawardha, Tahsil- Kawardha, District- Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh, District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh 5. Navneet Kaur W/o Shri Sachin Arora, Aged About 32 Years R/o Sonar Para Raigarh, Police Station, Tahsil And District- Raigarh, Chhattisgarh, Presently At Kawardha, Chhattisgarh, District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) For Appellants/Claimants : Mr. G.V. Kutumba Rao, Advocate For Insurance Company : Mr. R.N. Pusty, Advocate along with Mr. Akash Shrivastava, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 29.01 .2026 1. These two appeals have been preferred by the claimants against dismissal of their claim petitions. 2. MAC No. 311 of 2022 has been filed by the claimant Trilochan Singh Saluja for dismissal of his claim case No. 74/2017 passed by learned Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kabirdham dated 12.01.2022, whereas, MAC No. 328 of 2022 has been filed by the legal representatives of Indrajeet Singh Saluja, who lost his life in accident, against award passed in claim case No. 75/2017. 3. The facts in brief are that on 30.03.2017 the deceased Indrajeet Singh Saluja along with his father Trilochan Singh Saluja were going from Kawardha to Rajnandgaon in a Duster car bearing registration No. CG 096 JA 0091. Near Singhania Petrol Pump, Lohara at around 12 noon, the Duster car rammed into stationary Hywa bearing registration No. CG 10 ER 8001. In said accident, Indrajeet Singh lost his life, whereas, Trilochan Singh sustained injuries. 4. Trilochan Singh Saluja filed claim case No. 74/2017 claiming therein 3 compensation to the tune of Rs. 54,78,956.46/- on account of injuries sustained by him, whereas, parents and sisters of the deceased Indrajeet Singh Saluja filed claim case No. 75/32017 claiming therein compensation to the tune of Rs. 1,46,00,000/- inter alia on the ground that on the date of accident age of the deceased was 25 years and earning Rs. 5,00,000/- per annum. 5. The owner and driver of the offending Hywa filed reply and denied the contents of the claim petitions. They pleaded that on the date of accident the driver had valid and effective driving licence and vehicle was insured with the Insurance Company. They further pleaded that Hywa vehicle was not parked on main road rather it was parked at the side of the road near petrol pump. They pleaded that driver of the Duster vehicle was negligent and he rammed into stationary Hywa by driving it on wrong side of road. The Insurance Company filed reply in both the claim petitions and stated that in broad day light the driver of the Duster vehicle by driving it rashly and negligently dashed against stationary Hywa. It is also pleaded that there was no negligence on the part of the driver of the Hywa Truck. The learned Tribunal framed issues, parties led evidence, and thereafter, judgment and awards were passed in both the claim petitions. 6. Mr. G. V. Kutumba Rao would submit that there was negligence on the part of the offending Hywa as it was parked on the middle of the road. He would submit that the learned Tribunal failed to appreciate documentary evidence and recorded a finding that there was negligence on the part of the driver of the Duster car. He would submit that the spot map, FIR and charge-sheet would show that the Hywa vehicle was parked on the middle of the road, but the learned Tribunal discarded those documents. He would pray to allow these appeals. 4 7. Mr. R.N. Pusty, Advocate appearing for the Insurance Company would oppose. He would submit that there was no negligence on the part of driver of Hywa Truck as it was parked at the side of the road and the driver of the Duster car lost control and entered on wrong side and dashed the stationary Hywa, resultantly, the deceased Indrajeet Singh Saluja as well as his father Trilochan Singh Saluja sustained injuries. He would submit that both the appeals deserve to be dismissed. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 9. FIR (Ex. A/24) was lodged by Narendra Singh Saluja relative of the deceased, who stated in FIR that the offending vehicle Hywa was parked improperly and the driver of the Duster car lost control and dashed against it. Crime Detail Form (Ex A/25) would show that the offending Hywa was parked at the left side of the road in front of Rajesh Singhania Petrol Pump. The witnesses examined by the claimant failed to prove the fact that the offending vehicle was parked on wrong side and there was no negligence on the part of driver of the Duster car. The learned Tribunal appreciated documentary as well as oral evidence, and thereafter, dismissed the claim petitions. I do not find any good ground to interfere with the findings recorded by the learned Tribunal. Accordingly, both the appeals fail and are hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge $iddhant