1 CGHC010149192019 2026:CGHC:30384 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 899 of 2019 1 - Iffco-Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd., Through Its Manager, Supela Bhilai, District Durg Chhattisgarh. (Insurer Of Tractor Cg 08 Z 0985), District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant(s) versus 1 - Tilak Ram Kosariya (Deletad) As Per Hon'bel Court Order Dated 05- 05-2026 2 - Urmila Bai W/o Tilak Ram Aged About 45 Years Permanent Address - Village - Kahgaon, Ward No. 14, Post - Bharritola, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh. R/o C/o Alok Sahu, Laxmi Nagar, Supela, Behind Priyadarshini School, Supela - Bhilai, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh. (Claimant No. 2), District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 3 - Ku. Punit Bai D/o Tilak Ram Aged About 25 Years Permanent Address - Village - Kahgaon, Ward No. 14, Post - Bharritola, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh. R/o C/o Alok Sahu, Laxmi Nagar, Supela, Behind Priyadarshini School, Supela - Bhilai, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh. (Claimant No. 3), District : Durg, Chhattisgarh HARNEET KAUR Digitally signed by HARNEET KAUR Date: 2026.07.20 10:31:57 +0530 2 4 - Ku. Savita Bai D/o Tilak Ram Aged About 23 Years Permanent Address - Village - Kahgaon, Ward No. 14, Post - Bharritola, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh. R/o C/o Alok Sahu, Laxmi Nagar, Supela, Behind Priyadarshini School, Supela - Bhilai, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh. (Claimant No. 4), District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 5 - Ku. Anita Bai D/o Tilak Ram Aged About 21 Years Permanent Address - Village - Kahgaon, Ward No. 14, Post - Bharritola, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh. R/o C/o Alok Sahu, Laxmi Nagar, Supela, Behind Priyadarshini School, Supela - Bhilai, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh. (Claimant No. 5), District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 6 - Raju Ram Netam S/o Suresh Kumar Netam Aged About 31 Years R/o Village - Digwadi, Thana - Mohla, Tahsil - Manpur - District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh. (Driver Of Tractor C G 08 Z 0985), District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh 7 - Jangal Singh Dhurv S/o Budhram Aged About 44 Years R/o Vogrepara, Sivni, Thana - Khadgaon, Tahsil - Manpur, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh. (Owner Of Tractor Cg 08 Z 0985), District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Appellant(s) : Mrs. Astha Shukla on behalf of Mr. Vaibhav Shukla, advocates For Respondent(s) : None though served SB – Honb’le Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment on Board 3 16/07/2026 1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has been preferred by the appellant (Insurance Company) against the impugned award dated 29/01/2019 passed by learned First Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Durg in MACT No. 147/2017 whereby compensation of Rs. 10,42,000/- has been granted in favour of the claimants for the death of Umesh Kumar and the appellant (Insurance Company) has been fastened with the liability of payment of compensation. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that on the date of the accident, the driver of the offending vehicle namely Raju Ram Netam did not have valid and effective driving license as he has produced forged driving license which has duly been proved by the appellant (Insurance Company) and as such, the Claims Tribunal has erred in fastening the liability of payment of compensation upon the appellant (Insurance Company). 3. None appeared on behalf of the respondents though served. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant, considered her submissions and went through the record with utmost circumspection. 5. After hearing learned counsel for the appellant and after going through the record, particularly the impugned award, whereby learned Claims Tribunal, after a detailed discussion and analysis, has reached to the conclusion that the appellant (Insurance Company) has failed to led sufficient evidence and prove that the 4 driver of the offending vehicle did not have valid and effective driving license on the date of the accident and the offending vehicle was thus being plied in breach of terms and conditions of the insurance policy. In my considered opinion, the said finding recorded by the Claims Tribunal is a correct finding of fact based on evidence available on record, which is neither perverse nor contrary to the record. I do not find any merit in this appeal. 6. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own cost(s). Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) JUDGE Harneet