THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. vs DHRUV KUMAR CHOUDHARY — MAC/1111/2026

Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 06th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: CGHC010175512026

Filing Number

MAC/10132/2026

Filing Date

29-Apr-2026

Registration No

MAC/1111/2026

Registration Date

30-Apr-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

COMPENSATION MATTERS ( 12 )

Sub-Category

MATTERS RELATING TO APPEALS FILED BY INSURANCE COMPANIES. ( 1205 )

Judicial Branch

Civil Section

Decision Date

06-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Last updated 05-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.

    Adv. R.N.PUSTY,AKASH SHRIVASTAVA,AKASH SHRIVASTAVA, ,AKASH SHRIVASTAVA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.DHRUV KUMAR CHOUDHARY

  2. 2.Ratiram Fekar

  3. 3.Dev Charan Koshle

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 06-May-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh RajputView PDF

    The High Court of Chhattisgarh dismissed Oriental Insurance's appeal against a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal award of Rs. 39,46,697 to claimant Dhruv Kumar Choudhary for injuries from a 2019 accident. The insurance company's defense that the driver held a fake driving license failed because it did not produce the investigator or RTO official as witnesses to prove the claim, and the tribunal found the evidence legally inadmissible. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 01-May-2026

    For Orders [On Office Notes]

    Additional Registrar(j)

  4. 29-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. MAC/1111/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Chhattisgarh dismissed Oriental Insurance's appeal against a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal award of Rs. 39,46,697 to claimant Dhruv Kumar Choudhary for injuries from a 2019 accident. The insurance company's defense that the driver held a fake driving license failed because it did not produce the investigator or RTO official as witnesses to prove the claim, and the tribunal found the evidence legally inadmissible. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case