Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2020 DAILYLAW 540 (CHH)

DILESHWER v. SANTOSH KUMAR @ ANIL SAHU

MAC/968/2020 · 2026-04-19

Shri Sanjay K Agrawal

body2020

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 MAC No. 968 of 2020 2026:CGHC:17768 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 968 of 2020 1. Dileshwer S/o M. Kumar Dewangan, Aged About 34 Years; 2. Smt. Deepika W/o Dileshwer Dewangan, Aged About 27 Years; Both are R/o Village Mudhipar, Ward No. 12, Post Office Banbaghera, Tahsil And District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh. --- Appellants versus 1. Santosh Kumar @ Anil Sahu S/o Prakash Sahu @ Jhumukram, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Joratarai, Post Manghata, Police Station Somani, Tahsil And District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh. (Driver Of Vehicle No. C.G. 07-C-8525). 2. Ankit Jain S/o Ramesh Jain, Aged About 28 Years, R/o E.W.S. 13/7, Nehru Nagar East Bhilai - 3, Police Station Bhilai 3, District Durg Chhattisgarh. (Owner Of Vehicle No. C.G. 07-C-8525). 3. The United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Branch Office Paras Complex, Behind State Bank Of India, Gurudwara Station Road, District Durg Chhattisgarh. (Insurance Of Vehicle No. C.G. 07-C-8525). --- Respondents For Appellant :- Mr. Rakesh Kumar Thakur, Advocate. For Respondent No.3 :- Mr. Akash Shrivastava, Advocate, appears on behalf of Mr. R.N. Pusty, Advocate. ANKIT KUMAR SINGH Digitally signed by ANKIT KUMAR SINGH 2 MAC No. 968 of 2020 SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment On Board 20.04.2026 1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “Act of 1988”) has been preferred by the appellants/claimants seeking enhancement in the amount of compensation, challenging the impugned award dated 30.08.2019 passed by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh (for short “Claims Tribunal”) in Claim Case No. 17/2019, whereby learned Claims Tribunal has allowed claimants’ application and awarded compensation to the tune of 5,60,000/- ₹ as compensation along with interest for the death of Lokesh Dewangan. 2. Mr. Rakesh Kumar Thakur, learned counsel for the appellants/injured claimants, would submit that the learned Claims Tribunal has erred in awarding less amount of compensation in the facts of the present cases which is liable to be enhanced. 3. Mr. Akash Shrivastava, learned counsel for the Insurance Company, would oppose the prayer made by learned counsel for the appellants and submit that the Claims Tribunal has awarded just and proper compensation to the claimants herein. 3 MAC No. 968 of 2020 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein above and gone through the records precisely. 5. Admittedly, the Claims Tribunal after considering the oral and documentary evidence and after relying upon the principles of law laid down by the Supreme Court in the matters of Kishan Gopal and others v. Banam Lal and others 1 and Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation 2 has awarded compensation to the tune of ₹5,60,000/- for the death of a boy - Lokesh Dewangan, aged about 5 years on the date of accident, which in my considered opinion is correctly awarded by the Claims Tribunal. As such, I do not find any merit in the instant appeal, accordingly, the same is dismissed. No cost(s). Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Ankit 1 2014 (1) SCC 244 2 2009 (6) SCC 121