IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PAVAN KUMAR DWIVEDI MISC. APPEAL No. 89 of 2010 ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY Versus DECD.MOOLCHANDRA SAWLE THR.L.H. INDIRA AND 4 ORS. AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Sudhir Dandwate, learned counsel for the appellant/insurance company.

Shri Akash Rathi, learned counsel for the respondent.

WITH MISC. APPEAL No. 528 of 2010 INDIRA AND 02 ORS. AND OTHERS Versus DHUDHALAL AND 02 ORS. AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Akash Rathi, learned counsel for the appellant.

Shri Sudhir Dandwate, learned counsel for the respondent/insurance company.

Heard on : 25.11.2025 Pronounced on : 02.02.2026 ORDER Both these appeals have been filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act being aggrieved by the award dated 11.12.2009 passed in claim case No.65/2009.

2. M.A. No.89/2010 has been filed by the insurance company and M.A. No.528/2010 has been filed by the claimants for enhancement of compensation.

3. The facts necessary for adjudication of these cases are that on 09.01.2009, deceased Moolchand Saanwle was walking towards Baakaaner, a pick-up vehicle bearing registration number MP09-GE-3816 came from the side of Dhamnod. The driver of the said vehicle was driving the same in a rash and negligent manner and dashed into Moolchand because of which he died on the spot itself. A Merg intimation was registered at Merg No.4/2009 in terms of Section 174 at police station- Manawar on 09.01.2009 itself on the information of one Gulab Singh. The Merg intimation was registered on the information of above said Gulab Singh, who was Choukidaar of Bakaaner town. He stated that when he was taking round at night, he came to know that a person is lying near Bhagwanpura Joint. Thus, he went on the spot where he found dead-body thus intimation was given to concerned police station. The concerned police station accordingly registered Merg and carried out inquiry on the same. After initial investigation, an F.I.R. was registered in terms of Section 154 of Cr.P.C. at Crime No.59/2009 on 20.01.2009 i.e. after 11 days of accident under Section 304A of IPC against unknown vehicle. The police then investigated the matter and based on statements of two eye witnesses i.e. Anil and Gajanand, final report under Section 173 of Cr.P.C. was filed against the driver of the insured Pick-up vehicle bearing registration No.MP09-GE-3816. As such the number of the insured vehicle came into investigation on the statements of eye witnesses Anil and Gajanand. The final report is Ex.P-1 which found in the investigation that the accident was caused by the driver of the insured vehicle. F.I.R. is Ex.P-2, Merg intimation is Ex.P-4 and seizure memo of the vehicle is Ex.P-5.

4. The claims tribunal after recording the evidence, considering the documents of the criminal case as well as testimony of AW-3 Mukesh concluded that the accident was caused by the insured vehicle due to its rash and negligent driving by the driver and consequently, the compensation was awarded to the tune of Rs.18,48,350/- to the claimants while saddling insurance company with the liability to pay compensation.

5. Learned counsel for the insurance company submits that the company is aggrieved by the conclusion that the insured vehicle was involved in the accident. He points out that the date of accident was 09.01.2009 and F.I.R. was registered after a delay of 11 days i.e. on 20.01.2009 in which the vehicle number was not mentioned thus eve after 11 days the F.I.R. was registered against an unknown vehicle. He further points out that Ex.P-5 is the seizure memo of the vehicle which was seized at the police station on 12.03.2009 and on the very next day i.e. 13.03.2009, Chaalan was filed under Section173 of Cr.P.C. He thus submits that in fact this involvement of the insured vehicle was orchestrated only with an object to get compensation from the insurance company. He further points out that the claims tribunal has relied on the testimony of Mukesh AW-3 who in his