High Court of Chhattisgarh
Case Details
1 HIFZURRAHMAN ANSARI Digitally signed by HIFZURRAHMAN ANSARI Date: 2025.08.29 10:31:15 +0530 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 790 of 2021 NAFR 1 - Baliram Paikra S/o Dayaram Paikra Aged About 48 Years R/o Village Bamhani, Police Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh Station And Tahsil Kasdol, District 2 - Subham Paikra S/o Baliram Paikra Aged About 23 Years R/o Village Bamhani, Police Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh Station And Tahsil Kasdol, District 3 - Suraj Paikra S/o Baliram Paikra Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Bamhani, Police Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh Station And Tahsil Kasdol, District 4 - Minor Dewakumar S/o Baliram Paikra Aged About 15 Years No. 4 Is Minor, Through Natural Guardian Father Baliram Paikra, S/o Dayaram Paikra, R/o Village Bamhani, Police Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh Station And Tahsil Kasdol, District 5 - Minor Maya Paikra D/o Baliram Paikra Aged About 13 Years No. 5 Is Minor, Through Natural Guardian Father Baliram Paikra, S/o Dayaram Paikra, R/o Village Bamhani, Police Station And Tahsil Kasdol, District Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh versus … Appellants 1 - Ganesh Ram S/o Puniram Paikra Aged About 22 Years R/o Village Bamhani, Police Station And Tahsil Kasdol, District Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh ..........(Driver Of -5423) Vehicle Motorcycle Bearing Registration No. 06, G. G. C. 2 - Ramesh Kumar Paikra S/o Sitaram Paikra Aged About 43 Years R/o Village Bamhani, Police Station And Tahsil Kasdol, District Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh .......... (Owner Of Vehicle Motorcycle Bearing Registration No. C. G. 06, G. -5423) 3 - Tata A. I. G. General Insurance Co. Ltd. Division Office, 4th Floor, Gwalini Chamber, Vyapar Vihar, Main Road, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ..........(Insurer Of Vehicle Motorcycle Bearing Registration No. C. G. 06, G. -5423) ... Respondent(s) For Appellants
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Anil Gulati, Advocate For Respondent No. 3 : Mr. Sourabh Sharma, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput, Order on Board 26.08.2025 1) This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short MV 2 Act) has been filed by the appellants/claimants, being aggrieved by the award dated 12.08.2021 passed by Court of learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Baloda Bazar- Bhatapara District- Baloda Bazar- Bhatapara (C.G.) in Claim Case No. 131/2019. 2) By the impugned award, the learned Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs. 09,47,500/- to the appellants/claimants, on account of the death of the deceased/ Firtin Bai in an accident that took place on 26.07.2019 by rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle (Motor Cycle) bearing Registration No. CG-06-G-5423 by respondent No.1, owned by respondent No.2 and insured with respondent No.3/Insurance company. As a result of the said accident, the deceased died in hospital during treatment. 3) As per the pleadings, the deceased/Firtin Bai was aged about 47 years and was engaged in business of selling vegetable and earning a monthly income of Rs. 9,000/-. The appellants/claimants were dependent upon the income of the deceased. 4) The claim application was resisted by the respondent Nos. 1 & 2/Driver and Owner stating that the accident occurred solely on account of the negligence of the deceased herself, and that any liability to pay compensation, if at all, rests upon Respondent No. 3/Insurance Company. Respondent No.3 /Insurance company in usual course, denied the averments of the claim application and pleaded that the driver of the offending vehicle did not have valid and effective driving licence and there is a violation of terms and conditions of insurance policy. It is further contended that the deceased was himself responsible for the alleged accident and was also guilty of contributory negligence. It is also submitted that the First Information Report was lodged belatedly. 3 5) On the basis of the above pleadings, the learned Tribunal has framed 5 issues and after appreciating the material available on record decided the same in favour of the appellants/claimants and awarded above stated compensation. 6) Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants submits that the amount of compensation is on the lower side. Hence, suitable enhancement may be made by this Court. 7) Learned counsels for the respondent No.3 supports the award and submits that in view of evidence available on record and findings of the learned Tribunal is justified and just compensation has been awarded. 8) I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions and perused the records. 9) Considering the evidence available on record; age of the deceased; date of accident; nature of job; this Court is of the view that Rs. 8,000/- can be safely taken as monthly income of the deceased. 10) In light of the above and taking guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of National Insurance Company Ltd. V. Pranay Sethi and others; (2017) 16 SCC 680, Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Ors; (2009) 6 SCC 121 and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors; (2018) 18 SCC 130, this Court is recomputing the compensation as below:- S.N Particular Awarded by this Court Monthly Income of the deceased Future Prospect 25% Net Income Yearly income Personal expenditure 1/4 Yearly dependency 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Multiplier of 13 applied to assess 90,000X13= 11,70,000/- 8,000/- 8,000X25%=2,000/- 8,000+2000=10,000/- 10,000X12=1,20,000/- 1,20,000/4= 30,000/- 1,20,000-30,000=90,000/- 4 yearly loss of dependency Funeral Expenses Loss of estate 8. 9. 15,000/- 15,000/- 10. Filial consortium 01,60,000/- (40,000 /- each to A-1 & Total compensation A-4) Rs. 14,00,000/- 11) For the forgoing reasons, the appeal is allowed in part. The amount of compensation of Rs.9,47,500/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 14,00,000/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs. 9,47,500/-, the appellants/claimants are held entitled for an additional amount of Rs. 04,52,500/-. The additional amount shall carry interest @6% per anuum from the date of appeal i.e. 29.11.2021. The impugned award stands modified to the above extent. 12) The respondent No. 3 insurance company is directed to deposit the amount of compensation enhanced by this Court within a period of 60 days. On such deposit being made, the learned Tribunal shall pass an appropriate order with regard to apportionment, investment and disbursement of enhanced amount to appellants/claimants. 13) Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed. H.Ansari Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge