NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR M.A.(C) No. 1759 of 2024 1 - Satya Paikra, W/o Late Bhunpratap Paikra, aged about 27 years, R/o Gram Bhadora, P.S. And Tehsil Kasdol, District- Balodabazar- Bhatapara ( C.G.) 2 - Minor Sakshi Paikra, D/o Late Bhanupratap Paikra, aged about 2 Years, Through- The Natural Guardian Mother Satya Paikra W/o Bhunpratap Paikra, R/o Gram Bhadora, P.S. And Tehsil Kasdol, District- Balodabazar- Bhatapara ( C.G.) 3 - Fulbataiya Paikra, W/o Manharan Paikra, aged about 53 years, R/o Gram Bhadora, P.S. And Tehsil Kasdol, District- Balodabazar- Bhatapara ( C.G.) --- Appellants Versus 1 - Hemant Verma, S/o Dhanesh Kumar Verma, aged about 27 Years, R/po Sonkar Para, Bhatagaon Raipur, P.S. Bhatagaon, District- Raipur ( C.G.). Present R/o Mahamaya Chowk Rawan, P.S. Suhela, District- Balodabazar- Bhatapara ( C.G.). ( Owner And Driver Of The Offending Vehicle Car No. Cg 04 Je 4444 ) 2 - United India Insurance Company Limited Division Office Krishna Krishna Complex, Floor No. 1, Jail Road Raipur, District- Raipur ( C.G.) Issuing Office Station Road, Bhatapara, District- Balodabazar- Bhatapara ( C.G.). ( Insurer Company Of The Offending Vehicle Car No. Cg 04 Je 4444 ) --- Respondents For Appellants : Shri Suresh Kumar Verma, Advocate. For Respondent : Ms. Suchi Ramteke, Advocate appeared on behalf of Shri B.N., Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput Order on Board 24 /03/2026 1. The appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short ‘MV Act’) has been filed by the appellants / claimants, being aggrieved by the award dated 15/02/2022 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for short ‘Tribunal’), Balodabazaar – Bhatapara (C.G.) in MACT Claim Case No.13/2021. There is an application for condonation of delay. ASHISH TIWARI Digitally signed by ASHISH TIWARI Date: 2026.04.07 11:44:17 +0530 -2- 2. Heard on I.A. No. 01/2024 application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. There is a delay of 833 days in filing the appeal. 3. The appellant has stated in the application that he was not aware of the legal requirement that the appeal must be filed within the prescribed period of limitation, and due to a bona fide mistake, the appeal could not be filed in time. 4. The reasons assigned by the appellants does not appears to be just cogent reasons to constitute sufficient cause in filing the appeal in delay. Thus this Court is not inclined to allow I.A. No. 01/2024. Hence it is dismissed. 5. Even on merits, on perusal of the record, this Court finds that the deceased was aged about 40 years and his yearly income is of Rs.03,30,130/- being a Constable in the Police Department. The income was assessed by the learned Claims Tribunal on the basis of the material evidence available on record. The Tribunal further added 50% future prospects in his yearly income applied multiplier of 16, awarded funeral expenses, loss of spousal, parental and filial consortium, thus awarded total compensation of Rs.54,30,660/-. In this opinion, the compensation so awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal is just compensation, on the basis of evidence and material available on record which does not require any interference by this Court. Thus, the appeal is dismissed on limitation and on merits as well. Sd/- /- /-/-/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge Ashish