1 CGHC010224852019 2026:CGHC:28438 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1442 of 2019 Divisional Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd. Registered Office 3 Middleton Street Post Box No. 9229 Kolkata W.B., Division Office Agrawal Chamber First Floor, Vyapar Vihar Road, P.S. Civil Line, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant versus 1 - Smt. Durga, Wd/o. Late Shivpuri Goswami, Aged About 26 Years, R/o. Village Khuntapara Batara, Tahsil And P.S. Pali, District Korba, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Miss Ravina, D/o. Late Shivpuri Goswami, Aged About 7 Years, Minor Through Natural Guardian Smt. Durga Goswami (Mother), R/o. Village Khuntapara Batara, Tahsil And P.S. Pali, District Korba, Chhattisgarh. 3 – Deepak, S/o. Late Shivpuri Goswami, Aged About 3 Years, Minor Through Natural Guardian Smt. Durga Goswami (Mother), R/o. Village Khuntapara Batara, Tahsil And P.S. Pali, District Korba, Chhattisgarh. 4 – Jagatpuri, S/o. Late Laxmanpuri, Aged About 60 Years, R/o. Village Khuntapara Batara, Tahsil And P.S. Pali, District Korba, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Smt. Kirtan Bai, W/o. Jagatpuri, Aged About 58 Years, R/o. Village Khuntapara Batara, Tahsil And P.S. Pali, District Korba, Chhattisgarh. ……….Claimants ASHOK SAHU Digitally signed by ASHOK SAHU Date: 2026.07.09 15:57:59 +0530 2 6 - Jitendra @ Guddu, S/o. Mansingh Netam, Aged About 30 Years, R/o. Village Mungadih Gondpara, P.S. And Tahsil Pali, District Korba, Chhattisgarh..........Driver Of The Vehicle 7 - Manoj Kumar, S/o. Bahadurmal Sharma, Aged About 43 Years, R/o. Village Gorkhpali Jhilminda, District Bargarh, Odisha ............Owner Of The Vehicle. ... Respondents For Appellant : Mr. P.K.Tulsyan, Advocate For Respondents No.1 to 5 : Mr. A.L.Singroul, Advocate (Single Bench) Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment on Board 09.07.2026 1. The appellant/insurance company has preferred this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the impugned award dated 06.04.2019 passed by learned First Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur in Claim Case No.381/2018, by which the claim application of the claimants has been allowed and the appellant/insurance company is directed to pay the amount of compensation to the tune of Rs. 17,68,606/-. 2. Mr. P.K.Tulsyan, learned counsel for the appellant/ insurance company, would submit that the offending vehicle was being used for carrying passenger and deceased was not the cleaner of the vehicle but he was a passenger. He would further submit that the offending vehicle did not have a valid permit on the date and time 3 of incident. Therefore, the appellant/ insurance company is not liable to pay the amount of compensation. 3. Mr. A.L.Singroul, learned counsel for the claimants/respondents No.1 to 5, would support the impugned award and submits that the deceased was cleaner of the offending vehicle and the offending vehicle did have a valid permit on the date and time of incident; therefore, the appeal of the insurance company is liable to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection. 5. The learned Claims Tribunal has clearly recorded a finding that the deceased was the cleaner of the offending vehicle, he was not a passenger and that finding is a correct finding of fact based on evidence available on record. So far as the issue of valid permit is concerned, no evidence has been led by the insurance company that the owner did not have a valid permit to ply the vehicle on the road on the date and time of incident. Therefore, I do not find any merit in this appeal, the same deserves to be and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Ashok Judge