##PAGE1##

1

2026:CGHC:5073

Digitally

signed by

YOGESH NAFR

YOGESH TIWARI

TIWARI Date:

2026.01.30

18:56:31

+0530 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

MAC No. 1585 of 2018

The New India Insurance Company Limited Mumbai Branch Office 25

Chandralok Alganj, Luchnow, 226020 (Uttar Pradesh).

... Appellant

versus

1 - Tulshi Ram Dhruw S/o Durjan Singh Aged About 52 Years R/o

Rojgari Para, Kondagaon, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh.

2 - Smt. Ruma Dhruw W/o Tulshi Ram Dhruw Aged About 51 Years R/o

Rojgari Para, Kondagaon, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh.

3 - Kumari Usha D/o Tulshi Ram Dhruw Aged About 31 Years R/o

Rojgari Para, Kondagaon, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh.

4 - Kumari Harsha D/o Tulshi Ram Dhruw Aged About 23 Years R/o

Rojgari Para, Kondagaon, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh.

5 - Keshav S/o Tulshi Ram Dhruw Aged About 21 Years R/o Rojgari

Para, Kondagaon, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh.

6 - Ranjit Kumar S/o Kaliram R/o Jedasal, Tehsil - Jasrana, Thana -

Eka, District Firozabad (Uttar Pradesh).

7 - Tata Motors Limited, Plat No. T 1, T 2, Chinnhat Industrial Area,

Lucknow, 226019 (Uttar Pradesh).

... Respondents

(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)

For Appellant : Mr. Sudhir Agrawal, Advocate

For Respondent No.7 : Mr. Sangeet Kumar Kushwaha, Advocate

2

Hon’ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge

Judgment on Board

29.01.2026

1. This appeal is by the Insurance Company against the award dated

23.06.2018 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,

Kondagaon, District Kondagaon C.G. in Claim Case No.03/2017,

awarding total compensation of Rs.6,72,600/- with interest @ 9%

per annum from the date of application till realization while

fastening liability on the non-applicant Nos. 1 to 3 jointly and

severally.

2. As per the averments made in the claim petition, on 01.02.2016 at

about 03:00 p.m., near Bandhapara on NH-30 within the

jurisdiction of Police Station Kondagaon, non-applicant No. 1,

while driving the New Truck Sold Chasis

No.MAT476102GOA00301, Engine No.51L84266963 Temporary

Registration No.UP32ATC2575 (for short ‘offending vehicle)’ in a

rash and negligent manner, hit the scooter bearing registration No.

CG-27-A-2464 from behind, which was being driven by the

deceased. As a result, Yashwant Dhruv sustained grievous injuries

and was taken to RNT Hospital, Kondagaon, where he succumbed

to his injuries during treatment At the time of accident, the

offending vehicle was owned by non-applicant No.2, driven by

non-applicant No. 1 and insured with non-applicant

No.3/Insurance Company.

3

3. On claim petition being filed by the claimant under Sections 166,

140 of the Motor Vehicles Act seeking compensation to the tune of

Rs.17,05,000/- under various heads, the Tribunal considering the

evidence led by both the parties passed an award as mentioned in

para 1 of this judgment.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Learned

Tribunal has committed a grave error in fastening joint and several

liability upon the appellant Insurance Company despite recording a

clear and categorical finding regarding the fake driving licence of

the driver of the offending vehicle. In para 15 of the impugned

award, the Tribunal has held that the offending vehicle was being

driven on the basis of a fake driving licence at the time of accident.

The Insurance Company had specifically taken defence in para 14

by examining the concerned RTO witness, Narendra Singh (NAW-

2), who categorically deposed that the driving licence (Exhibit D-2)

was not issued from his office. The Insurance Company also

examined Lakhpati Borkar (NAW-1), and it stands admitted that

non-applicant No. 1 Ranjit Kumar was driving the offending

vehicle. Paras 13 to 15 of the impugned award clearly discuss and

establish the breach of policy condition; however, despite such

findings, the Tribunal has illegally saddled the appellant with

liability in para 27 of the award. The said approach is contrary to

the settled law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pepsu

Road Transport Corporation vs. National Insurance Co.