1 2026:CGHC:4971 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 185 of 2022 * - Kejuram Dhruv S/o Puranlal Dhruv Aged About 63 Years C/o Baisakhu Prajapati, R/o Village Jondhra, Thana Pachpedi And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. Other Add. - Village Puran, Tahsil And District Baloda Bazar, Chhattisgarh…. (Owner, Trolley No. CG-04-D-3274) (But actually trolley of owner is Baisakhu S/o Moli Prajapati, Respondent No. 3) ... Appellant Versus 1 - Bodhan S/o Amaru Kenwat, Aged About 42 Years R/o Village Bhilauni Tahsil Masturi, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Smt. Milautin Bai W/o Bodhan Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Bhilauni Tahsil Masturi, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Baisakhu S/o Moli Prajapati Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Jondhra, Police Chowki Pachpedi, Tahsil Masturi, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Rajkumar S/o Baisakhu Prajapati Aged About 20 Years R/o Village Jondhra, Police Chowki Pachpedi, Tahsil Masturi, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 5 - IFFCO TOKIYO General Insurance Co. Ltd. Shop No. 205, IInd Floor N.M. Silver Plaza, Opposite Mining Office, Mahavir Nagar, Ring Road No. 1, Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Appellant : Mr. Shivam Agrawal, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. Hemant Kumar Agrawal, Advocate For Respondent No. 3/Owner For Respondent No. 5/ Insurance Company : : Mr. Devendra Kashyap, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. P.K. Patel, Advocate Ms. Shrejal Gupta, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. Vaibhav Shukla, Advocate Digitally signed by RAMESH KUMAR VATTI Date: 2026.02.02 13:51:22 +0530 2 Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment on Board 29/01/2026 1. The appellant/owner of the Trolley has filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act assailing the judgment and award passed by the learned First Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) in Claim Case No. 214/2016 dated 07.10.2021, whereby the learned Claims Tribunal has granted compensation to the tune of Rs.4,98,600/- with interest @ 9% per annum to the claimants and fastened liability with the owner of the Tractor and owner of the Trolley and exonerated the Insurance Company. 2. Mr. Shivam Agrawal, learned counsel for the appellant/owner of the Trolley would submit that on 27.04.2015 at about 07:30 am Rajkumar S/o Baisakhu, who was minor at the time of accident, was driving the Tractor bearing registration No. CG-04 / HK-5831 and due to rash and negligent driving, deceased- Bajrang Kewat, who was travelling on the said Tractor and Trolley, fell down in between Tractor and Trolley and lost his life. He would contend that the claimants who are parents of the deceased filed claim case under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. It is argued that the learned Claims Tribunal fastened liability with the owner of the Trolley i.e. appellant herein on the ground that it was registered in his name. He would submit that the Trolley was sold to Mahendra Verma, Dealer of Mahendra Tractor in the year 2013 and there is admission in this regard in affidavit of Kejuram filed under Order 18 Rule 4 of CPC. He would submit that as the Trolley was sold, therefore the learned Claims Tribunal committed error of law while fastening liability on the owner of the Trolley. 3 3. On the other hand, Mr. Devendra Kashyap and Ms. Shrejal Gupta, learned counsels appearing for the respective respondents would oppose. They would submit that the ownership of Trolley was never transferred from appellant herein to Mahendra Verma, Dealer of Mahendra Tractor, therefore, the learned Claims Tribunal rightly fastened the liability on the owner of the Tractor and owner of the Trolley. It is also argued that the Trolley was not insured and that was one of the reasons for fastening liability with the owner of the Tractor and Trolley. They would submit that the appeal deserves to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the learned Claims Tribunal with utmost circumspection. 5. Though Kejuram Dhruv, appellant herein on affidavit, filed under Order 18 Rule 4 of CPC, stated that the vehicle was sold to Mahendra Verma, Dealer of Mahendra Tractor and said Trolley was purchased by the owner of the Tractor i.e. Baisakhu, but in this regard no documentary evidence has been adduced by the appellant herein. Mere statement of fact would not suffice. The person who is claiming that there was transfer of ownership should have placed on record material documents to demonstrate this fact. Further the Trolley was not insured with the Insurance Company. 6. It is also argued that an application for grant of interim custody of the Trolley was moved by the Baisakhu/owner of the Tractor, therefore it can be assumed that he was owner of the Tractor as well as Trolley, but this issue was not raised before the learned Claims Tribunal and on the basis of grant of interim custody of the vehicle, it cannot be concluded that Baisakhu was owner of the vehicle. 4 7. Taking into consideration the above discussed facts, I do not find any good ground to interfere with the judgment and award dated 07.10.2021 passed by the learned Claims Tribunal. Accordingly, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge vatti