Smt. Kanti Bai & Another v. Kailash Dhurv & Ors
Case Details
1 Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2025:CGHC:28217 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1134 of 2018 1 - Smt. Kanti Bai W/o Late Shakuram Dhurv, Aged About 42 Years R/o Village - Parsada, Nayapara, Post, Tehsil And District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Smt. Kalyani Dhurv, W/o Hari Singh Dhurv, Aged About 40 Years R/o Village - Parsada, Nayapara, Post - Tehsil And District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. (Claimants), District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant(s) versus 1 - Kailash Dhurv S/o Gulab Dhurv, Aged About 36 Years R/o Shiv Nagar, Handipara, Tehsil And District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. (Driver Of The Offending Vehicle Bearing No. C.G. 04 L.N. - 7793), District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Gupteshwar Dewagan, S/o Anil Kumar Dewagan, Aged About 27 Years R/o Shiv Nagar, Handipara, Tehsil And District Raipur 2 Chhattisgarh. (Owner Of The Offending Vehicle Bearing No. C.G. 04 L.N. 7793)., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Tata A.I.G. General Insurance Company Ltd., Through Branch Manager Branch Office D.B. Complex, Rajbandha Maidan, Raipur Tehsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh. (Insurer Of The Offending Vehicle Bearing No.C.G. 04 L.N. - 7793), District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Appellant(s)
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Akhilesh Mishra, Advocate. For Respondent(s) No. 1 & 2 : None. For Respondent No. 3 : Mr. Saurabh Gupta, Advocate. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad 26/06/2025 Order on Board 1. This appeal has been filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, against the award dated 26.03.2018 passed by the learned 6th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.), in Claim Case No. 426/2017 (“Smt. Kanti Bai & Another vs. Kailash Dhurv & Ors.”) whereby an amount of Rs. 1,48,000/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum has been awarded in the favour of the claimants of the deceased for their irreparable loss. 2. Brief facts of the case, is that on 09.04.2017 at about 4:00 P.M., 3 deceased Smt. Peelabai met with an accident while traveling as a pillion rider on a motorcycle bearing registration no. C.G.04 L.N.7793. The motorcycle turned turtle near Government Hospital, Arang, due to rash and negligent driving on the part of its driver. Smt. Peelabai sustained grievous injuries on her head and other parts of the body. Thereafter, she was initially given first aid at Government Hospital, Arang, and was admitted to Super Specialty Hospital, Raipur, where she succumbed to her injuries during treatment on 11.04.2017. Accordingly, the claimants prayed for compensation holding respondent No.1 (driver), respondent No.2 (owner) and respondent No.3 (insurer) jointly and severally liable. The said accident was reported at Police Station- Arang, where the concerned police authorities registered Crime No. 244/17 under Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), and subsequently filed a charge-sheet before the competent court. It is further contended that the deceased Smt. Peelabai aged about 56 years and was a healthy woman who used to earn Rs. 8,000/- per month by selling vegetables. The claimants were wholly dependent upon the deceased. Due to her untimely death, the claimants suffered immense pain, mental agony and significant financial loss. That, upon issuance of notice of the claim application, respondents No.1 and 2 submitted separate written statements, wherein they admitted 4 that respondent No. 2 was the owner and respondent No. 3 was the insurer of the said motorcycle. However, they denied the allegation of rash and negligent driving, contending that a sudden appearance of a cow on the road caused the vehicle to turn turtle while trying to avoid hitting the animal. They admitted that the deceased died due to injuries sustained in the accident but denied the claimants' entitlement to compensation as prayed. That, respondent No. 3 (insurance company) has filed its written statement denying all material allegations. It was specifically denied that the motorcycle turned turtle while avoiding cattle, causing the death of the deceased. It also denied that the deceased was earning Rs. 8,000/- per month from selling vegetables, and emphasized that no income certificate was produced before the learned Tribunal. Respondent No. 3 also raised the plea of violation of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy and, therefore, claimed that the insurer was not liable to pay compensation. That, when the matter came up before the learned Claims Tribunal, the Tribunal framed four issues for consideration. In paragraph 18 of the judgment, the Tribunal recorded a finding that the motorcycle was insured with respondent No. 3. Therefore, the appellants/claimants of the deceased preferred an application claiming a total compensation of Rs. 12,50,000/-. 5 3. After considering the evidence and documents brought on record, the tribunal assessed the loss of dependency of the deceased as Rs. 50,000/-. Further Rs. 63,000/- towards medical treatment expenses, Rs. 20,000/- towards love and affection and Rs. 15,000/- towards funeral expenses has been awarded. Accordingly, the Claims Tribunal has awarded total compensation of Rs. 1,48,000/- in favour of the daughters of the deceased with interest @ 9% per annum, from the date of application till its realization. Hence, this appeal for enhancement. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants submits that the claims Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 1,48,000/- which is not in accordance with law and the same is required to be enhanced in accordance with law. He further submits that the compensation awarded under other heads is also on lower side and needs to be enhanced. Hence, this appeal may be allowed by enhancing the compensation amount suitably. 5. On the other hand, it has argued on behalf of the counsel for respondent No. 3 that in the facts and circumstances of case, the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is just and proper and requires no further enhancement. 6. None for respondent Nos. 1 & 2. 7. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record. 8. In a motor accident claim case, what is important is that, the 6 compensation to be awarded by the Courts/Tribunals should be just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the case. It should neither be a meager amount of compensation, nor a Bonanza. 9. Now this Court shall examine as to whether the compensation of awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the given facts and circumstances of the case. 10. As regards the income of the deceased, though the claimants have pleaded that the deceased was earning Rs. 8,000/- per month from her work, but no documentary evidence in this regard has been produced by the claimants, the learned Tribunal has assessed the loss of dependency of the deceased as Rs. 50,000/-, which appears to be proper on accident. Hence, accepting the loss of dependency of the deceased as Rs. 50,000/- and Rs. 63,000/- towards medical treatment expenses. In view of judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma (Smt.) and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121. The claimants are further entitled for Rs. 18,000/- towards loss of estate (increase of 10% in every three years) and Rs. 18,000/- for funeral expenses (increase of 10% in every three years). As per 'Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nanu, reported in AIR Online 2018 SC 189, the claimants are further entitled for Rs. 40,000/- each 7 (40,000 X 2+10%+10%) for loss of love and affection and consortium of Rs. 96,000/- has been awarded Accordingly, the appellants/claimants i.e. daughter of the deceased would become entitled for total compensation of Rs./- in the following manner:- S.No. 01. 02. Heads Calculation Towards loss of dependency Rs. 50,000/- Towards love and affection and Rs. 96,000/- consortium (Rs. 40,000X2+10% +10%) 03. Towards loss of estate along Rs. 18,000/- with increase of 10% in every three years. 04. Towards Funeral Expenses Rs. 18,000/- along with increase of 10% in every three years. 05. Towards Medical Treatment Rs. 63,000/- Expenses Total Rs. 2,45,000/- 11. Thus, the total compensation is recomputed as Rs. 2,45,000/-. After deducting Rs. 1,48,000/- as awarded by the tribunal, the enhancement would be Rs. 97,000/-. 12. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. The claimants/appellants i.e. daughter of the deceased shall be entitled for the enhanced amount of Rs. 97,000/- in addition to 8 what is already awarded by the claims Tribunal. The enhanced amount will carry interest @ 6% from the date of enhancement of the award till its realization. The impugned award stands modified to the above extent and rest of the conditions shall remain intact. 13. The Registry is further directed to communicate the claimants in writing about “the enhanced amount” in this appeal as against the award made by the Tribunal below. The said communication be made in Hindi (Deonagri) language and the help of paralegal workers may be availed with a co-ordination of Secretary, State Legal Services Authority and the DLSA of the concerned area where the claimants resides. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat