Dismissed¶25

Branch Manager L. and T. General Insurance Company Limited v. Chhatri Patel

Chhattisgarh HC1 Jul 2025MAC/480/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

MAC No. 480 of 2018, High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur, Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad, order dated 02/07/2025 (2025:CGHC:30498); insurer's appeal against MACT Kabirdham award dated 31.10.2017 in Claim Case No.111 of 2015; compensation Rs.2,75,000/-; claimants Chhatri Patel and Sukwaro Bai; deceased Ku. Sangeeta; accident dated 27.2.2015; offending truck registration No. CG 07 ZC 1402; driver-owner Pyarelal Sinha; defence based on absence of permit and fitness certificate; insurer's evidence closed by Tribunal order dated 25.11.2016; joint and several liability upheld; appeal dismissed; L&T General Insurance now HDFC ERGO General Insurance.

What did the court decide?

None to the insurer; the appeal filed by the insurer is dismissed ¶25

Branch Manager L. and T. General Insurance Company Limited Vs Chhatri Patel — Chhattisgarh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

Digitally signedby GOPALSINGH Date:2025.07.2618:51:16 +0530

¶3

2025:CGHC:30498

¶4

NAFR

¶5

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

MAC No. 480 of 2018

¶7

1 - Branch Manager L. And T. General Insurance Company Limited Branch Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, Now Known As H.D.F.C. Ergo General Insurance Company Limited, Through Manager, D.M.Tower, New Paresiay, Indore (M.P.) Through Branch Office- Near Chawla Complex, Devendra Nagar Road, P.S. Devendra Nagar, Tahsil And District Raipur, Chhattisgarh (Insurer Of Vehicle Truck Registration No. Cg-07-Zc-1402), District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶8

... Appellant

¶9

versus

¶10

1 - Chhatri Patel S/o Bijiram Patel Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Birendranagar, Thana S./lohara, Tahsil S./lohara, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh, District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh

¶11

2 - Sukwaro Bai W/o Chhatri Patel Aged About 38 Years R/o Village Birendranagar, Thana S./lohara, Tahsil S./lohara, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh (Claimants), District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh

¶12

3 - Pyarelal Sinha S/o Aghnu Ram Sinha Aged About 58 Years R/o Village Than Khamhariya, Thana Than Khamhariya, Tahsil And District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh (Driver And Owner Of Vehicle Truck Registration No. Cg-07-Zc-1402), District : Bemetara, Chhattisgarh

¶13

... Respondents

¶14

¶15

For Appellant	: Shri Tanmay Rai, Advocate on behalf of Shri N.K.
	Thakur, Advocate
For Respondents No.1 and 2	: Shri Kanhaiya Yadav, Advocate on behalf of Shri
	Dharmesh Shrivastava, Advocate
For Respondent No.3	: None for respondent No.3 though served

¶16

Hon’ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

¶17

Order on Board

¶18

02/07/2025

¶19

1. This is an appeal by the insurance company against the award dated 31.10.2017 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kabirdham in Claim Case No.111 of 2015, whereby the Claims Tribunal has granted compensation of Rs.2,75,000/- in favour of the claimants fastening liability to satisfy the award upon respondent No.3/the driver and owner and the appellant/insurer jointly and severally.

¶20

2. Case, in short, is that on 27.2.2015 at about 10 a.m., Ku. Sangeeta (deceased) was going to school from her home and respondent No.3 drove the offending truck bearing registration No.CG 07 ZC 1402 in rash and negligent manner and dashed the deceased, as a result of which, the deceased sustained grievous injuries and she died on the spot.

¶21

3. Though the appellant/insurance company has filed this appeal challenging the liability fastened upon it, however, from perusal of issue No.4 which has been decided in paragraph 11 of the award, it is manifest that the insurance company has not produced any evidence in support of its contention that

¶22

¶23

the offending truck was not having requisite permit and fitness certificate. When, during the course of argument, it was specifically clarified from the learned counsel for the appellant/insurance company, he could not show any document in the shape of evidence showing that the vehicle was not having any fitness certificate and permit. In fact, the Tribunal vide order dated 25.11.2016 has closed the opportunity of the insurance company to lead evidence as despite giving opportunity the evidence was not led by the insurance company.

¶24

4. Considering the aforesaid aspect of the matter, when it has not been proved that the vehicle was not having proper fitness certificate as well as permit, the liability fastened upon the insurance company is in accordance with law.

¶25

5. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the insurer is dismissed.

¶26

Sd/-

¶27

( Amitendra Kishore Prasad )

¶28

JUDGE

¶29

Gopal Singh

Branch Manager L. and T. General Insurance Company Limited v. Chhatri Patel

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Branch Manager L. and T. General Insurance Company Limited v. Chhatri Patel

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Harshvardhan Sharma Vs Abhishek Gauraha

Smt. Nandani Thakur Vs Narendra Singh

Universal Sompo General Insurance Co. Vs Smt. Nandini Thakur

Smt. Sarita Sharma Vs Jaiky Sharma

Raghuvir Thakur (Minor) Vs Uday Singh Thakur

Branch Manager, the New India Insurance Company Limited Vs Smt. Rupa Gupta