Dismissed¶40

The National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Dhaniram Yadav

Chhattisgarh HC5 Apr 2026MAC/1186/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Chhattisgarh High Court, Bilaspur; MAC No. 1186 of 2019 and MAC No. 1187 of 2019 clubbed; National Insurance Co. Ltd. appeals against common Claims Tribunal award dated 06.03.2019; gratuitous passenger risk not covered under insurance policy; deceased traveling as helper of offending vehicle and as representative authorized by owner of goods; Section 173 Motor Vehicles Act 1988; common accident; compensation Rs.12,81,172/- and Rs.9,73,379/-; correct findings of fact without perversity; both appeals dismissed, parties to bear own costs; Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal; decided 06.04.2025.

What did the court decide?

No relief to the appellant-Insurance Company; both appeals dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own costs, with the impugned award left undisturbed. ¶40

The National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Dhaniram Yadav — Motor Accident Claims | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No relief to the appellant-Insurance Company; both appeals dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own costs, with the impugned award left undisturbed.

¶40

Issue for consideration

Whether the deceased, Rajesh Yadav and Pratap Singh Kawar, were traveling as gratuitous passengers in the offending vehicle whose risk was not covered under the insurance policy, such that the Claims Tribunal erred in fastening the liability to pay compensation upon the appellant-Insurance Company.

¶32

Court's answer

The owner of the vehicle, Mahavir Jain, clearly stated that deceased Rajesh Yadav was traveling as helper of the offending vehicle and deceased Pratap Singh Kawar as representative person authorized by the owner of the goods to monitor safe delivery of the goods, and nothing to the contrary could be extracted from him in cross-examination.

¶37

Ratio / Principle

In absence of any evidence that the deceased were traveling as gratuitous passengers in the offending vehicle at the time of the accident, the Claims Tribunal rightly fastened the liability to pay compensation upon the appellant-Insurance Company.

¶37

Key takeaways

The findings recorded by the Claims Tribunal are correct findings of fact based on evidence and suffer from no perversity or illegality; the impugned award dated 06.03.2019 warrants no interference.ratio¶39

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Motor Accident Claims Appeals (S. 173, Motor Vehicles Act, 1988) - Gratuitous passenger - Liability of insurer - The National Insurance Co. Ltd. challenged a common Claims Tribunal award dt. 06.03.2019 awarding Rs.12,81,172/- and Rs.9,73,379/- for deaths arising out of a common accident, contending the deceased were gratuitous passengers whose risk was not covered under the policy. Held, dismissing both appeals: the insurer's own witnesses (RTO officer Sadanand Jagde and insurance officer Arun Kumar Yadav) never deposed that the deceased traveled as gratuitous passengers; the owner Mahavir Jain proved that Rajesh Yadav traveled as helper of the vehicle and Pratap Singh Kawar as representative authorized by the owner of the goods to monitor safe delivery, and nothing to the contrary was extracted in cross-examination; absent evidence of gratuitous passenger status, the Tribunal rightly fastened liability on the insurer; its findings being correct findings of fact without perversity or illegality, no interference was warranted. Parties left to bear their own costs. (Sanjay K. Agrawal J., 06.04.2025)

¶1

¶2

Digitally SAIFAN signed by KHAN SAIFAN KHAN

¶3

2026:CGHC:15493

¶4

NAFR

¶5

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

MAC No. 1186 of 2019

¶7

The National Insurance Co. Ltd. Through Its Branch Manager, Branch Office Korba, At Meenu Complex, Main Road, Kosabadi, Korba, Tahsil And District Korba Chhattisgarh., District : Korba, Chhattisgarh

¶8

--- Appellant

¶9

Versus

¶10

1 - Dhaniram Yadav S/o Kuwar Sai Aged About 43 Years R/o Village Banwar, Police Station Katghora, Tahsil Podi Uproda, District Korba Chhattisgarh., District : Korba, Chhattisgarh

¶11

2 - Smt. Kamla Bai W/o Shri Dhaniram Yadav Aged About 41 Years R/o Village Banwar, Police Station Katghora, Tahsil Podi Uproda, District Korba Chhattisgarh. (Claimants), District : Korba, Chhattisgarh

¶12

3 - Rahmuddin Ansari S/o Saduran Ansari Aged About 51 Years R/o Budhwari Bazar (Near Sarswati Mandir School), Police Station Cseb, Tahsil Korba, District Korba Chhattisgarh. Permanent Address - Birbandha, Post Office, Roh, Police Station Garhwa, Tahsil And District Garhwa, Jharkhand. (Driver)

¶13

4 - Mahavir Jain S/o Late Lalchand Jain, R/o Near Old Bus Stand, Korba, Police Station Kotwali, Korba, Tahsil And District Korba Chhattisgarh. (Owner), District : Korba, Chhattisgarh

¶14

--- Respondents

¶15

WITH

¶16

MAC No. 1187 of 2019

¶17

The National Insurance Co. Ltd. Through Its Branch Manager, Branch Office Korba At Meenu Complex, Main Road Kosabadi, Korba, Tahsil And District- Korba, Chhattisgarh.............(Respdt. No.3), District : Koriya (Baikunthpur), Chhattisgarh

¶18

--- Appellant

¶19

Versus

¶20

1 - Smt. Ratni Bai Wd/o Late Pratap Kanwar Aged About 33 Years R/o Village Barraspur, Outpost Jatga, Tahsil Katghora, District- Korba, Chhattisgarh.....................(Claimants), District : Korba, Chhattisgarh

¶21

¶22

2 - Ku. Laxmi D/o Late Pratap Kanwar Aged About 11 Years R/o Village Barraspur, Outpost Jatga, Tahsil Katghora, District- Korba, Chhattisgarh.....................(Claimants), District : Korba, Chhattisgarh 3 - Ku. Sarswati D/o Late Pratap Kanwar Aged About 8 Years R/o Village Barraspur, Outpost Jatga, Tahsil Katghora, District- Korba, Chhattisgarh.....................(Claimants), District : Korba, Chhattisgarh 4 - Pradeep Singh S/o Pratap Kanwar Aged About 6 Years R/o Village Barraspur, Outpost Jatga, Tahsil Katghora, District- Korba, Chhattisgarh.....................(Claimants), District : Korba, Chhattisgarh 5 - Sammar Singh S/o Ghasi Singh Aged About 62 Years R/o Village Barraspur, Outpost Jatga, Tahsil Katghora, District- Korba, Chhattisgarh.....................(Claimants), District : Korba, Chhattisgarh

¶23

6 - Rahmuddin Ansari S/o Saduran Ansari Aged About 51 Years R/o Budhwari Bazar (Near Sarswati Mandir School), P.S. Cseb, Tahsil Korba, District- Korba, Chhattisgarh., Premanent Address- Birbandha, Po. Roh, P.S. Garhwa, Tahsil And District- Garhwa, Jharkhand................(Driver), District : Garhwa *, Jharkhand

¶24

7 - Mahavir Jain S/o Late Lalchand Jain Near Old Bus Stand, Korba, P.S. Kotwali, Korba, Tahsil And District- Korba, Chhattisgarh............ (Owner), District : Korba, Chhattisgarh

¶25

[Cause-title taken	---Respondents from Case Information System (CIS)]
-----------------------------------	-------------------------------------------------------------
For Appellant :	Mr. Akash Shrivastava, Advocate on behalf of Mr. RN Pusty, Advocate
For Respondent :	Ms. Bhavika Kotecha, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Parag Kotecha, Advocate

¶26

Single Bench: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal (Order on Board)

¶27

06.04.2025

¶28

1. Regard being had to the similitude of the question of fact and law involved and being arising out of a common accident, on the joint request of learned counsel for the parties, both these appeals are clubbed together, heard together and being disposed of by this common order.

¶29

2. In both the appeals filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles

¶30

¶31

Act, 1988 (for short the “Act of 1988”) the appellant- Insurance Company is challenging common impugned award dt. 06.03.2019, whereby the claim applications filed by the claimants have been allowed and compensation to the tune of Rs.12,81,172/- and Rs.9,73,379/- has been awarded to them and said amount is held to be payable by the appellant- Insurance Company herein.

¶32

3. Learned counsel for the appellant would make sole submission that since deceased persons, namely, Rajesh Yadav and Pratap Singh Kawar were traveling as gratuitous passengers in the offending vehicle, whose risk were not covered under the insurance policy. Therefore, the learned Claims Tribunal is absolutely unjustified in fastening the liability to pay the compensation upon the appellant- insurance company. As such, the impugned award is liable to be set aside.

¶33

4 . On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent would submit that since deceased- Rajesh Yadav was traveling as helper of the offending vehicle, whereas deceased- Pratap Singh Kawar was traveling as representative person authorized by the owner of the goods to monitor safe delivery of the goods, it cannot be said that the deceased persons were traveling as gratuitous passengers in the offending vehicle at the time of accident. As such, the learned Claims tribunal has rightly fastened the liability to pay compensation upon the insurance company more particularly when the factum of deceased persons traveling in the capacity of helper and authorized representative respectively, has been duly proved by the statement of claimant, eye-witness Rajkumar Chouhan and owner of the vehicle-

¶34

¶35

Mahavir Jain. Hence, both the appeals are liable to be dismissed.

¶36

5 . I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection.

¶37

6 . In the case at hand, though the insurance company only took a plea that the deceased persons were traveling as gratuitous passengers in the offending vehicle at the time of accident and led evidence in shape of statements of officer of RTO, Korba, namely, Sadanand Jagde and officer of the Insurance Company, namely, Arun Kumar Yadav, but both of them did not say at any point of time that deceased persons- Rajesh Yadav and Pratap Singh Kawar were traveling as gratuitous passengers in the offending vehicle at the time of accident. Indeed, owner of the vehicle- Mahavir Jain, has clearly stated that deceased- Rajesh Yadav was traveling as helper of the offending vehicle, whereas deceased- Pratap Singh Kawar was traveling as representative person authorized by the owner of the goods to monitor safe delivery of the goods. Mahavir Jain has been subjected to cross-examination, but nothing could be extracted from him to hold that the deceased persons were traveling as as gratuitous passengers in the offending vehicle at the time of accident. As such, in absence of any evidence to show that at the time of the accident, deceased persons- Rajesh Yadav and Pratap Singh Kawar were traveling as gratuitous passengers in the offending vehicle, the claims tribunal has rightly fastened the liability to pay compensation upon the appellant- Insurance Company. Thus, I do not consider it a fit case

¶38

¶39

warranting interference in the impugned award dated 06.03.2019, passed by the learned Claims Tribunal, as the findings recorded by the claims tribunal are correct findings of fact based on evidence and same does not suffers from any perversity or illegality.

¶40

7 . Accordingly, I do not find any merit in both the appeals. It deserve to be and are hereby dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own

¶41

costs.

¶42

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge

¶43

s@if

The National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Dhaniram Yadav

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Dhaniram Yadav

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Puran Singh Chandel Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Durga Prasad Sahu Vs Ravi Shankar Sahu

Ankit Singh Paikara Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt.Jamuna Bai Sone Vs Rajesh Kumar Dangi

Bhupendra Sahu Vs Ranveer Singh

Smt. Manti Netam Vs Chandakaramu Naidu