1 2026:CGHC:14685 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1861 of 2025 1 - ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd. Address - Through- Legal Manager ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd., Chawla Complex, Devendra Nagar, Road, Raipur Thana Devendra Nagar District- Raipur (C.G.) Present Address - 5th Floor, Skypark, Opp. Banthia Hospital, Canal Road, Raipur (C.G.) (Insurance Company Of Motorcycle Mh 33 Ab 4903). ...Appellant versus 1 - Dilsay Minj (Dead) Nil 1.1 - Jhalo Bai Minj W/o Dilsay Minj Aged About 46 Years R/o Chanwargaon, P.O. Thana Seetagaon, District- Rajnandgaon, C.G. 1.2 - Deepak Kumar Minj S/o Vijay Kumar Minj Aged About 12 Years R/o Chanwargaon, P.O. Thana Seetagaon, District - Rajnandgaon (C.G.) For Minor Guardian Grand Mother Jhalo Bai. 1.3 - Vikas Kumar Minj S/o Vijay Kumar Minj Aged About 10 Years R/o Chanwargaon, P.O. Thana Seetagaon, District - Rajnandgaon (C.G.) For Minor Guardian Grand Mother Jhalo Bai. 1.4 - Kishore Kumar Minj S/o Dilsay Minj Aged About 20 Years R/o Chanwargaon, P.O. Thana Seetagaon, District - Rajnandgaon (C.G.). 2 - Baishku Sonu Potawi S/o Sonu Potawi R/o Gram Kosmi, Police Chowki Sawargaon, District- Gadhchiroli, Maharashtra (Driver Of Motor Cycle Mh33 Ab 4903) 3 - Mansharam Usendi S/o Gawli Usendi R/o Gram Markegaon, Thana Dhanora, District- Gadhchiroli, Maharashtra (Owner Of Motorcycle Bearing No. Mh33 Ab 4903). ... Respondents AMITA DUBEY Digitally signed by AMITA DUBEY Date: 2026.04.06 18:26:40 +0530 2 For Appellant : Mr. Shekhar Ameen and Ms. Gunja Rani Agrawal, Advocates {Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sachin Singh Rajput} Order on Board 27/03/2026 1. Heard on I. A. No. 1/2025, which is an application for condonation of delay of 55 days in filing the appeal. 2. Though opposed, however, looking to the reason stated in the application, this Court is satisfied that the appellant has sufficient cause for condoning the delay of 55 days in filing the appeal. 3. Accordingly, the application {I.A. No. 1/2025} is allowed. Delay of 55 days in filing the appeal is hereby condoned. 4. Herd on admission. 5. The appellant-Insurance Company has preferred this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for brevity, “MV Act, 1988”) calling in question the validity, correctness and judicial propriety of the impugned award dated 07.03.2025 passed by 4th Upper Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur, District-Raipur (C.G.) (for short, 'Claims Tribunal') in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 49/2023. 6. By the Award impugned, against the claim of Rs.20,58,000/- the learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a totol compensation of Rs. 18,79,760/- in favour of respondents/Claimants on account of death of deceased- Vijay Kumar Minj in an accident that took place on 18.11.2022 by rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle (Motorcycle) bearing registration No. MH33AB/4903 by respondent No. 3 3/Driver, owned by respondent No. 4/Owner and insured with the appellant/Insurance Company. 7. As per pleading of the claim application deceased/ Vijay Kumar Minj died in a accident who was aged about 34 years and was working as Mason and was earning Rs. 12,000/- per month. Thus, above compensation was claimed. 8. Respondents No. 1 & 2 have not filed written statement and remained ex-parte. 9. Appellant/Insurance Company filed separate written statement denying substantial pleading made by the respondents/claimants and pleaded that there is a violation of terms and conditions of the insurance policy. 10. The Claims Tribunal framed as many as five issues on the basis of above broad pleadings made in the claim application and after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence available on record, above stated compensation has been awarded. 11. Learned counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company submits that offending vehicle was driven by respondent No. 4/driver without any valid & effective driving licence. Police has registered a case under Section 3/181 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 and the charge-sheet has been filed against the respondent No. 4/driver, thus, it can safely be presumed that he was not holding any valid and effective driving license to drive the offending vehicle at the time of accident, thus, there is a violation of terms and conditions of the insurance policy. Therefore, the learned Claims Tribunal has erred in saddling the liability of payment of compensation upon the appellant/Insurance Company. 12. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the material available on record including record of the Claims Tribunal. 4 13. The plea of violation of terms and condition of insurance policy is taken by the insurance company. From the perusal of record, it does not appear that Insurance company has led any cogent and prudent evidence to prove this facts. Merely because an offence under Section 3/181 of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 has been filed against the owner in absence of any cogent and prudent evidence, this this Court is not in agreement to the submission made by learned counsel for the appellant that there is any violation of term and conditions of the insurance policy. It is settled position that once Insurance Company has taken a plea of violation of terms and conditions of insurance policy, it is incumbent upon the Insurance Company to prove the same. 14. In view of the above, this Court does not find any merits of the appeal worth for admission . Appeal thus, fails and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge Ami