1 CGHC010443552024 2026:CGHC:31765 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 38 of 2025 Amjad Khan S/o Abdul Gaffar Khan Aged About 44 Years R/o Jagannath Chowk, Kota Colony, Kota, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus 1 - Chinta Ram Kosre S/o Late Bisahu Ram Kosre Aged About 55 Years R/o Jogigufa, P.S. Dhamdha, District Durg Chhattisgarh (Driver) 2 - Gappu Mahinda Pvt. Ltd. Through Ajay Singh Gill, Director, Office Address, Bus Stand Pandri, Raipur, Tahsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh (Owner) 3 - The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Through Divisional Manager, Station Road, Parakh Compex, Near Ujala Bhawan, P.S. Mohan Nagar, District Durg Chhattisgarh (Insurer) --- Respondents For Appellant : Mr. Pravesh Sahu, Advocate For Respondents No.1 & 2 : None For Respondents No.3 : Mr. Raj Awasthi, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Judgment on Board (24.07.2026) 1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short the "Act of 1988") has been preferred by the appellant/claimant seeking pay and recover of the amount of compensation, challenging the impugned award dated 09.10.2024, passed in Claim Case Digitally signed by AMIT PATEL 2 No.547/2021, whereby the learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs. 1,84,750/- as compensation under Section 166 of the Act of 1988 to the claimant Amjad Khan, aged about 43 years, who sustained injuries in a road accident which took place on 10.02.2020. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that while deciding the issues of the case, the Claims has come to the conclusion that the offending vehicle was being plied in breach of policy condition and the driver was not having valid and effective driving license and as such the insurance company is not liable to pay the compensation. He further submits that although there is a breach of the insurance policy, the vehicle was insured at the time of the incident. Therefore, an order of “pay and recover” may be passed. In support of his submissions, he has placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Sunita and Ors. vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd and Ors.1 3. Learned counsel for respondent No.3/insurance company would submit that there is a breach of insurance policy, the Claims Tribunal after appreciating oral and documentary evidence available on record rightly fastened the liability upon owner and driver. Hence, the award passed by the Claims Tribunal is just and proper and requires no interference. 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. In the case at hand, true it is that the Claims Tribunal found a breach of the policy conditions inasmuch as, at the time of the accident, the driver 1 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1464 3 Chinta Ram Kosre did not possess a valid and effective driving licence to drove the offeneding vehicle. However, the Tribunal did not pass an order for “pay and recover” as prayed for by the appellant/claimant before this Court. It is clear from the record that on the date of the incident, the offending vehicle was covered by a insurance policy, which has been exhibited as Ex. D/1. In view of the above, and applying the ratio of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sunita (Supra) & Manuara Khatun and Others Vs. Rajesh Kumar Singh and Others, reported in (2017) 4 SCC 796, I direct Respondent No.3/Insurance Company to first pay the amount of compensation and thereafter recover the same from the owner and/or driver by filing an execution petition before the concerned Claims Tribunal. 6. In the result, the appeal is allowed. 7. Records of the Tribunal along with a copy of this judgment be sent forthwith for compliance and necessary action, if any. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge AMIT PATEL