Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:46665 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 945 of 2020 1 - Komal Bai Kurre W/o Late Saheb Lal Aged About 33 Years R/o Near Satbahaniya Mandir Devaridih Thana Torwa , Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Rupesh Kumar Kurre S/o Late Saheb Lal Kurre Aged About 17 Years Minor Through Legal Guardian Mother Komal Bai , R/o Near Satbahaniya Mandir Devaridih Thana Torwa , Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 3 - Ritik Kumar Kurre S/o Late Saheb Lal Kurre Aged About 9 Years Minor Through Legal Guardian Mother Komal Bai , R/o Near Satbahaniya Mandir Devaridih Thana Torwa , Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 4 - Ratnesh Kumar Kurre S/o Late Saheb Lal Kurre Aged About 6 Years Minor Through Legal Guardian Mother Komal Bai , R/o Near Satbahaniya Mandir Devaridih Thana Torwa , Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 5 - Nanki Bai Kurre W/o Late Tularam Kurre Aged About 67 Years R/o Near Satbahaniya Mandir Devaridih Thana Torwa , Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. --- Appellants versus 1 - Tinku Kumar Yadav S/o Narayan Kumar Yadav Aged About 28 Years R/o Village Vakava, Thana Mohfsil, District Aara (Bihar) Hall Mukam Through Owner / Director, Vardan Layjistak Privet Limited Vasudev B/5 Sector 5, Devendra Nager, Near Ram Janki Mandir Raipur Tashil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh.(Driver). 2 2 - Through Owner / Director Vardan Layjistak Privet Limited Vasudev B/5 Sector 5, Devendra Nager, Near Ram Janki Mandir Raipur Tashil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh. (Owner). 3 - Branch Manager United India Insurance Company Limited Branch Office 2nd Floor Guru Kripa Tower In Front Of Auto Mobile Byapar Vihar Tahsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh. (Insurer). --- Respondents MAC No. 1028 of 2020 United India Insurance Company Limited Local Branch Office Raigarh, Through Its Authorised Authority, Manager, T.P. Hub, United India Ins. Co. Ltd. Ist Floor, Lic Building, Magarpara, Road, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. Versus ---Appellant 1 - Komal Bai Kurre Wd/o Late Saheb Lal Aged About 33 Years R/o Near Satbahaniya Mandir Dewarideeh, Police Station Torva, Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Rupesh Kumar Kurre S/o Late Saheb Lal Aged About 17 Years Minor
Legal Reasoning
Through Their Mother Smt. Komal Bai Kurre (Respondent No. 4), R/o Near Satbahaniya Mandir Dewarideeh, Police Station Torva, Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 3 - Ritik Kumar Kurre S/o Late Saheb Lal Aged About 9 Years Minor Through Their Mother Smt. Komal Bai Kurre (Respondent No. 4), R/o Near Satbahaniya Mandir Dewarideeh, Police Station Torva, Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 4 - Ratnesh Kumar Kurre S/o Saheb Lal Aged About 6 Years Minor Through Their Mother Smt. Komal Bai Kurre (Respondent No. 4), R/o Near Satbahaniya Mandir Dewarideeh, Police Station Torva, Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 5 - Nanki Bai Kurre Wd/o Late Tularam Kurre Aged About 67 Years R/o Near Satbahaniya Mandir Dewarideeh, Police Station Torva, Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 6 - Tinku Kumar Yadav S/o Narayan Yadav Aged About 28 Years R/o Village Vakva, P.O. Mohfasil, District Aara (Bihar), Hal Mukam Through Owner / 3 Director, Vardan Logistic Private Limited, Vasudev B/s Sector -5, Devendra Nagar, Near Ram Janki Mandir, Raipur, Tahsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 7 - Through Owner / Director Vardan Logistic Private Limited Vasudev B/5 Sector -5, Devendra Nagar, Near Ram Janki Mandir, Raipur, Tahsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh. (Cause title, as taken from Case Information System} --- Respondents For Appellants/Claimants : Ms. Shalini Jangde, Advocate holding brief of Mr. A. L. Singroul, Advocate For Insurance : Mr. Dashrath Gupta, Advocate Company For Driver and : Mr. K. Rohan and Mr. Tessy Abrahim Advocates Owner 11/09/2025 Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput Order On Board 1. M.A. (C) No. 945 of 2020 filed by the claimants, seeking enhancement of compensation awarded under award and M.A. (C) No. 1028 of 2020, filed by the United India Insurance Company Limited seeking reduction in the compensation awarded in favour of the claimants, are
Decision
being disposed of by this common award as both the appeals arise out of same accident and are directed against the award dated 20.02.2020 passed by 8th Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (For short, ‘the Tribunal’) in claim case No. 805 /2018, whereby Tribunal has awarded a total compensation of Rs. 80,87,660/- alongwith interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition, till its actual payment. {For the sake of convenience, the parties would be referred to as per their status shown in the claim petition} 2. An application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 4 (henceforth, MV Act, 1988) has been filed by the claimants before the Claims Tribunal claiming compensation to the tune of Rs.1,33,91,400/- pleading inter alia that deceased- Saheblal Kurre was riding his motorcycle bearing registration No. C.G.-11-A.P. -2666, which was dashed by rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle Trailer bearing registration No. CG04/LD-7032 (hereinafter referred to as, 'the offending vehicle') by its driver i.e. Tinku Kumar Yadav, as a result of which, Saheblal Kurre sustained severe injuries and succumbed to those injuries in the spot itself. The offending vehicle was owned by respondent No. 2 and insured with respondent No. 3/Insurance Company. It was further pleaded in the claim application that on the date of accident i.e. 06.07.2018, deceased was aged about 34 years and was working as a Head-cook in Kara Hospitality Venture Pvt. Ltd. and earning Rs. 55,000/-per month. The claimants, who are unfortunate widow, children & mother of deceased, were dependent upon the income of the deceased and after his death they were deprived from the same. 3. Respondents No. 1 & 2 /owner and driver resisted the claim application on various grounds whereas Respondent/ insurance company took a plea that there is a violation of terms and conditions of the insurance policy, therefore, the insurance company is not liable to pay compensation. 4. On the basis of above broad pleadings, learned Tribunal framed as many as six issues, decided those issues in favour of the appellants / claimants and awarded afore-stated compensation in favour of the claimants. Learned Claims Tribunal has saddled the liability of payment of compensation upon respondent No. 3 / Insurance 5 Company, as it could not establish the violation of policy conditions. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant / claimants (in MAC No. 945/2020) would submit that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just & proper in all respect, however, the learned Tribunal has erred in not awarding any sum towards parental and filial consortium to claimant Nos. 2 to 5 i.e. children & mother of the deceased in view of the judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in the matter of Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram and ors. reported in (2018) 18 SCC 130, therefore, it is prayed by parental and filial consortium may be awarded to the appellants/claimants. 6. Mr. Gupta, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 3 /Insurance Company would submit that the income of the deceased could not be proved in accordance with law; there was contributory negligence on the part of the deceased, therefore, it seems that amount of compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is on higher side, which deserves to be reduced suitably. He submits that there is violation of terms and conditions of the insurance policy hence insurance company may be exonerated from payment of compensation. He goes on to submit that the deceased contributed in causing the accident. Mr. K. Rohan and Mr. Tessy Abrahim, learned counsels for driver and Owner supports the impugned award and submits that the learned Tribunal has passed the award in accordance with law which needs no interference by this Court. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions and perused the records. 7. 8. 6 9. This Court would like to deal with first contention raised by Mr. Gupta, learned counsel appearing for the Insurance company with regard to contributory negligence on the part of the deceased. The case in hand, the deceased was riding a motorcycle, the offending vehicle is a Trailor. The criminal case was registered against the driver of the offending vehicle. 10.From the evidence available on record and from the criminal case papers, it can safely be gathered that it is the driver of the offending vehicle, which was negligent in causing the accident. Apart from this, it does not appear that the plea taken by the Insurance Company has been proved by leading cogent & prudent evidence. Even, driver of the offending vehicle was not examined to throw some light on the manner, in which the accident had occurred. 11. The next contention of Mr. Gupta is with regard to violation of terms and condition of insurance policy. It is settled position of law that if the insurance company takes a plea of violation of terms and condition of the insurance policy, it has to prove the same with cogent and prudent evidence. In the case in hand the insurance company failed to do so. Learned Tribunal while deciding the issue No. 3 in this regard, categorically held that insurance company has not led any documentary or oral evidence. Therefore, this contention is rejected. 12.The claim application under the Motor Vehicles Act are to be dealt with summarily and the claimants are not expected to prove the factum of accident like a criminal trial beyond reasonable doubt. On the basis of preponderance of probability, if the Tribunal comes to the conclusion that the accident had occurred and negligence can be gathered from the evidence available on record, this Court is of the opinion that 7 finding so recorded by the Claims Tribunal in respect to issue No. 1 is based on proper appreciation of evidence available on record, which does not call for any interference by this Court. Hence, the same is hereby affirmed. 13.This would lead me to the next point as to whether the appellants/claimants (in MAC No. 945 /2020) have not been able to prove the income of the deceased and as to whether excessive compensation has been awarded? 14.Learned Claims Tribunal has relied upon salary certificate as Ex.P-5 & Ex.P-6 to assess the monthly income of the deceased. According to which, he used to earn Rs. 54,700/- per month by working as Head Cook in Kara Hospitality Venture Limited. Nothing substantial has been brought on record to disbelieve these salary certificates (Ex. P-5 & P-6). Learned Claims Tribunal after assessing the aforesaid income of the deceased, has also made necessary deduction towards income tax and after relying on the decisions rendered by the Supreme Court in the matters of Sarla Verma and ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation and ors. reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121 and National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi and ors, reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 and assessed & awarded aforesaid compensation of Rs.80,87,660/- in favour of the appellants/claimants, which also need not to be interfered with. Hence, this contention raised the appellant / Insurance Company is also hereby rejected. 15.However, from the perusal of the impugned award, it appears that learned Claims Tribunal has not awarded any sum towards parental and filial consortium to claimant Nos. 2 to 5 i.e. children & mother of the deceased. Therefore, in view of the judgment rendered by the 8 Supreme Court in the matter of Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd.. (supra), this Court is of the opinion, an amount of Rs. 40,000/- each to claimants No. 2 to 5 i.e. Rs.1,60,000/- would make the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal as just and proper compensation. 16.In view of foregoing, the appeal filed by the appellants/claimants I.e MAC No. 945/2020 is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs.80,87,660/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 82,47,660/-. The appellant is entitled for a further sum of Rs. 1,60,000/- over and above the amount of Rs. Rs.80,87,660/- awarded by the Tribunal. 17.The above enhanced amount of compensation of Rs. 1,60,000/- shall carry interest @ 6 percent per annum from the date of filing of appeal i.e. 21.07.2020 till its actual payment. Rest of the conditions mentioned in the award shall remain intact. The award stands modified to the above extent. 18.The respondent No. 3/United India Insurance Company Ltd. is granted two months’ time to deposit enhanced amount of compensation of Rs. 1,06,000/- along with interest before the concerned Tribunal. 19.In the result, MAC No. 945/2020 filed by the appellants/claimants for enhancement of amount under award is allowed in part. Whereas, MAC No. 1028 /2020 filed by United India Insurance Company Limited, being sans merit, is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. No cost (s). Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput ) Judge Ami AMITA DUBEY Digitally signed by AMITA DUBEY Date: 2025.09.26 15:04:36 +0530