IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

AT GWALIOR

BEFORE

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G. S. AHLUWALIA

th

ON THE 13 OF JANUARY, 2026 CIVIL REVISION No. 744 of 2025

BRANCH MANAGER, NEW INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY

LTD.

Versus

AMIT VANSHKAR AND OTHERS

Appearance:

Shri Kamal S. Rochlani - Advocate for appellant. Shri R.P. Gupta - Advocate for respondent No.1.

WITH

MISC. APPEAL No. 5380 of 2025

AMIT VANSHKAR

Versus

MUKESH SINGH YADAV AND OTHERS

Appearance:

Shri R.P. Gupta - Advocate for appellant.

Shri Kamal S. Rochlani - Advocate for respondent

No.3/Insurance Company.

ORDER

1. By this common order, Civil Revision No.744/2025 and M.A.

No.5380/2025 shall be decided.

2. Civil Revision No.744/2025 has been filed under Section 115 of the CPC against the award dated 16.04.2025 passed by Second Additional Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Datia, in MACC No.153/2022, challenging the application of the principle of pay and recover, whereas Miscellaneous Appeal No.5380/2025 has been filed by the claimant against the same award dated 16.04.2025 passed in MACC No.153/2022, seeking enhancement of the compensation amount.

3. Since the controversy revolves in a very narrow compass, therefore, it is suffice to mention here that on 07.06.2022, the claimant was going on a Luna moped bearing registration No. MP-32 MK-4137 along with his friend from Gwalior to Datia. At about 11:30 p.m., as soon as he reached near Sikroda intersection on Dabra-Gwalior Road, he was dashed by the offending car bearing registration No. MP-07 CR-3267, and as a result, the claimant sustained multiple injuries. The claimant filed a claim petition under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, which has been allowed by award dated 16.04.2025, and after exonerating the insurance company, the Claims Tribunal has applied the principle of pay and recover.

4. Civil Revision No.744/2025

5. Challenging the direction given by the Claims Tribunal to the Insurance Company to pay the compensation amount with liberty to recover the same, it is submitted by counsel for applicant that after the amendment in the Motor Vehicles Act, the Claims Tribunal cannot apply the principle of pay and recover, and when the Claims Tribunal comes to a conclusion that there was a violation of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy and exonerates the insurance company, then the principle of pay and recover cannot be applied.

6. Per contra, it is submitted by counsel for the claimant that this Court, by order dated 11.03.2025 passed in Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Company Limited, Registered Office Hari Nivas Towers vs. Munni Bai and Others in M.A. No.5819/2024, has elaborately dealt with this issue and has held that even after the amendment in the Motor Vehicles Act, the Claims Tribunal/Court can always apply the principle of pay and recover.

7. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

8. This Court, in the case of Munni Bai (supra), has held as under :

"This Miscellaneous Appeal, under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, (for brevity “the Act”) has been filed against Award dated 02.05.2024 passed by Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Guna (M.P.) in M.A.C.C. No.140/2023.

2. A solitary ground was raised by counsel for the Insurance Company that although the Insurance Company has been exonerated on the ground that the offending vehicle was being driven in violation of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy as the driver of the vehicle was not having valid and effective licence, but the Claims Tribunal has applied the principle of pay and recover. It is submitted that the principle of pay and recover came into force for the first time after the judgment was passed by the Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited versus Swaran Singh and others reported in 2004 ACJ 1. Thereafter, Section 149 was renumbered as Section 150 of the Act. It is submitted that earlier proviso to sub-section 4 of Section 149 and sub-section 5 provided for the concept of pay and recover. However, after amendment, the proviso to