1 CGHC010227862023 2026:CGHC:41607 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1175 of 2023 1 - Smt. Yashoda W/o. B. R. Ratnesh, Aged About 49 Years R/o. Quarter No. 52b, Nirmala Sector Dallirajhara, P.S. - Rajhara, Tehsil - Daundi, District - Balod, Chhattisgarh. (Wrongly Mentioned As 47 Years In The Impugned Award) -- Claimants 2 - Kumari Martha D/o. B. R. Ratnesh, Aged About 26 Years R/o. Quarter No. 52b, Nirmala Sector Dallirajhara, P.S. - Rajhara, Tehsil - Daundi, District - Balod, Chhattisgarh. (Wrongly Mentioned As 24 Years In The Impugned Award) 3 - Kumari Maria D/o. B. R. Ratnesh, Aged About 24 Years R/o. Quarter No. 52b, Nirmala Sector Dallirajhara, P.S. - Rajhara, Tehsil - Daundi, District - Balod, Chhattisgarh. (Wrongly Mentioned As 22 Years In The Impugned Award) 4 - Joseph S/o. B. R. Ratnesh, Aged About 23 Years R/o. Quarter No. 52b, Nirmala Sector Dallirajhara, P.S. - Rajhara, Tehsil - Daundi, District - Balod, Chhattisgarh. (Wrongly Mentioned As 21 Years In The Impugned Award) ...Appellant(s) versus 1 – B. R. Ratnesh S/o. Late Manbodhi Ratnesh, Aged About 52 Years R/o. Quarter No. 52B, Nirmala Sector Dallirajhara, P.S. - Rajhara, Tehsil - Daundi, District - Balod, Chhattisgarh. ( Owner Of The Offending Mahindra Bolero Bearing No. C.G. 07/B.E. 7785) BHOLA NATH KHATAI Digitally signed by BHOLA NATH KHATAI Date: 2026.09.26 12:44:35 +0530 2 2 - Tata AIG General Insurance Company Limited, Through Its Branch Manager, Shop No. 106-107, First Floor, Wall Fort Ozone, Building, Fafadih Chowk, Raipur, District - Balod, Chhattisgarh. ( Insurer Of The Offending Mahindra Bolero Bearing No. CG 07/B.E. 7785) ... Respondent(s) For Appellants : Ms. Sweksha Sharma, Advocate For Respondent No.2 : Mr. Sourabh Gupta, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board (24.09.2026) 1.This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has been preferred by the appellants/claimants against the order dated 15.03.2023 passed by the First Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Balod, District Balod (C.G.), in Claim Case No.171/2021, whereby the claim petition filed by the appellants/claimants has been dismissed. 2.The facts of the case, in brief, are that on the intervening night of 28/29.03.2021, Andriyas @ Andiyas Ratnesh, aged about 19 years, after celebrating his birthday with his friends, was returning from Mahamaya Mathur Farm House to Dallirajhara in Mahindra Bolero bearing registration No.CG-07-BE-7785. When the said vehicle reached near Mahamaya Culvert at the turn near Village Chorha Padav, in an attempt to save cattle which had suddenly come onto the road, its wheel struck a boulder lying on the roadside, as a result of which the vehicle overturned. In the said accident, Andriyas sustained grievous head injuries and, upon being taken to Dallirajhara Hospital, was declared dead by the attending doctor. In connection with the said accident, Crime No.38/2021 was registered at Police 3 Station Dallirajhara. 3.The appellants/claimants, who are the mother, two sisters and one brother of the deceased, filed a claim petition before the Tribunal under Section 164 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Upon consideration of the evidence available on record, the Tribunal recorded a finding that the deceased died in the motor accident and that the offending vehicle was insured with respondent No.2/Insurance Company. However, the claim petition came to be dismissed on the ground that there was a breach of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy and that the claim petition filed under Section 164 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 was not maintainable. 4.Learned counsel appearing for the appellants submits that, as per the insurance policy (Ex.D-1), premium towards the compulsory personal accident cover for the owner-driver had been paid. The relevant portion of the insurance policy reads thus: Add: Compulsory PA Cover for Owner-Driver Rs.15,00,000 : 450 Add: Legal Liability to paid driver as per (IMT 28) : 50 5.It is contended that even if the deceased is treated as the son of the registered owner and was driving the vehicle at the time of the accident, the risk of the owner-driver was duly covered under the insurance policy. It is, therefore, submitted that the appellants are entitled to claim compensation from the Insurance Company in terms of the coverage provided under the said policy. It is further contended that the Tribunal has neither properly considered nor adjudicated upon the alleged breach of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy nor undertaken any assessment or computation of the compensation to which the claimants may otherwise be 4 entitled. Learned counsel, therefore, prays that the impugned award be set aside and the matter be remanded to the Tribunal for fresh adjudication and determination of the compensation payable to the claimants in accordance with law. 6.Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2/Insurance Company submits that the issue relating to the alleged breach of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy has not been properly considered or adjudicated upon by the Tribunal while passing the impugned award. He, therefore, prays that an opportunity be granted to the Insurance Company to lead additional evidence on the said issue. 7.Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with due circumspection. 8.Having regard to the terms of the insurance policy (Ex.D-1), particularly the coverage towards the compulsory personal accident cover for the owner-driver, as also the statement of Ashish Verma, who was examined as a witness on behalf of the Insurance Company, this Court is of the considered opinion that the matter requires reconsideration by the Tribunal. 9.Accordingly, the impugned award dated 15.03.2023 is hereby set aside. The matter is remanded to the learned Tribunal for fresh adjudication in accordance with law. The Tribunal shall afford due and adequate opportunity to both the parties to lead additional evidence, if so advised. Thereafter, upon affording the parties proper and effective opportunity of hearing, the Tribunal shall decide the claim petition afresh on its own merits and in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four months from 5 14.10.2026. 10. The parties are directed to appear before the learned Tribunal on 14.10.2026. 11. With the aforesaid directions, the appeal stands disposed of. 12. The Registry is directed to transmit the record of the learned Tribunal forthwith. Sd/- Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Khatai