1 2026:CGHC:15876 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 498 of 2020 Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Company Limited, Divisional Office- Bramha Road, Near Kumkum Hotel, Ambikapur, Police Station And Tehsil Ambikapur, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh. Through Authorized Signatory, Manager T.P. Hub United India Insurance Company Limited, T.P. Hub/Divisional Office, LIC Building, Magharpara Chowk, Bilaspur, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus 1 - Smt. Nayantara Bhagat, Wd/o. Late Pravin Kumar Bhagat, Aged About 36 Years, Caste Uranv, Occupation- Panchayat Secretary (Panchayat Worker), Resident Of Village Gopinagar, Post Larima, Police Station And Tehsil Kusmi, District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. 2 - Minor Shristi Bhagat, D/o. Late Pravin Kumar Bhagat, Aged About 8 Years, Caste Uranv, Minor Through Respondent No.1 Mother Namely Smt. Nayantara Bhagat, Wd/o. Late Pravin Kumar Bhagat, Resident Of Village Gopinagar, Post Larima, Police Station And Tehsil Kusmi, District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. 3 - Minor Himanchal Bhagat, S/o. Late Pravin Kumar Bhagat, Aged About 6 Years, Caste Uranv, Minor Through Respondent No.1 Mother ASHOK SAHU Digitally signed by ASHOK SAHU Date: 2026.04.07 17:02:34 +0530 2 namely Smt. Nayantara Bhagat, Aged About 36 Years, Wd/o. Late Pravin Kumar Bhagat, Resident Of Village Gopinagar, Post Larima, Police Station And Tehsil Kusmi, District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. 4 - Minor Mayank Bhagat, S/o. Late Pravin Kumar Bhagat, Aged About 3 Years, Caste Uranv, Minor Through Respondent No.1 Mother namely Smt. Nayantara Bhagat, Aged About 36 Years, Wd/o. Late Pravin Kumar Bhagat, Resident Of Village Gopinagar, Post Larima, Police Station And Tehsil Kusmi, District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. 5 - Rajendra Prasad, S/o. Late Badal Ram, Caste Uranv, Aged About 57 Years, Occupation Service, Resident Of Village Gopinagar, Post Larima, Police Station And Tehsil Kusmi, District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. 6 - Smt. Chameli Bhagat, W/o. Rajendra Prasad, Aged About 52 Years, Occupation Anganwadi Worker, Caste Uranv, Resident Of Village Gopinagar, Post Larima, Police Station And Tehsil Kusmi, District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. ….Claimants 7 - Chandan Gupta, S/o. Kanhai Prasad Gupta, Aged About 31 Years, R/o. Village Kamlapur, Post Jawaharnagar, Police Station Korandha, Tehsil Kusmi, District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh…..(Driver). 8 - Shivam Gupta, S/o. Jayshankar Gupta, Aged About 23 Years, R/o. Village Kamlapur, Post Jawaharnagar, Police Station Korandha, Tehsil Kusmi, District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh…..(Owner). ... Respondents 3 For Appellant : Mr. Abhishek Mishra, Advocate on behalf of Mr. B.N.Nande, Advocate For Respondents No. 1 to 6 : Mr. Jayant Singh Bais, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Rishi Rahul Soni, Advocate For Respondents No. 7 & 8 : Mr. Vikrant Pillay, Advocate (Single Bench) Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment on Board 07.04.2026 1. The appellant/insurance company has preferred this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 calling in question the legality, validity and correctness of the impugned award dated 23.11.2019 passed by Sixth Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ambikapur, District Sarguja, in Claim Case No.52/2019 by which the claim application of the claimants is allowed and liability has been fastened upon the insurance company to pay the amount of compensation. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant/insurance company, would submit that the deceased was also contributory negligent in driving the vehicle, as it is a case of head-on collision, therefore, 50% amount of compensation ought to have been deducted towards the contributory negligent of the deceased and the appeal be allowed. 4 3. Learned counsels appearing for the respondents would support the impugned award and submit that 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 appellant/insurance company had filed return before the Claims Tribunal and has taken an alternative plea in para 28(e) that if the Court comes to the conclusion that the accident has occurred then it is a case of head-on collision, therefore, the driver, owner & insurance company of both the vehicle should be liable towards the contributory negligence, but surprising no witness has been examined on behalf of the insurance company except the statement of Anup Mehta, Investigator, who has investigated the matter to prove the fact of contributory negligence. As such, there is no evidence on record that the deceased was also contributory negligent in driving the offending vehicle. Therefore, I do not find any merit in this appeal, the same deserves to be and accordingly dismissed. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Ashok Judge