2025:CGHC:37301 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 464 of 2022 The New India Assurance Company Limited Through Its Divisional Manager, Divisional Office Sada Compled, Transport Nagar Korba, District Korba Chhattisgarh. … Appellant versus 1 - Smt. Lalita Singh Thakur Wd/o Late Narayan Singh Aged About 45 Years R/o House No. M.D./76, Vikas Nagar, P.S. Kusunda, District Korba Chhattisgarh. 2 - Hunkareshwar Singh Thakur S/o Late Narayan Singh Aged About 27 Years R/o House No. M.D./76, Vikas Nagar, P.S. Kusunda, District Korba Chhattisgarh. 3 - Ansuman Kumar Singh S/o Late Narayan Singh Aged About 24 Years R/o House No. M.D./76, Vikas Nagar, P.S. Kusunda, District Korba Chhattisgarh. 4 - Bhuwneshwar @ Bhuanweshwar Prasad Karsh S/o Phulchand Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Mudpara, Saragaon, District- Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh. Present Address - Near Officer Colony, In Front Of Primary School, P.S. Bakimongra, District - Korba Chhattisgarh. HARNEET KAUR Digitally signed by HARNEET KAUR Date: 2025.08.04 11:12:32 +0530 5 - Sadhuram Kashyap S/o Ganpat Ram Kashyap R/o Village Kasaipali, P.O. Jwali, District - Korba Chhattisgarh. 6 - National Insurance Company Ltd. Through- Divisional Office Plot No, 768, Above Bandhan Bank First Floor Niharika Main Road, Kosabadi, District Korba Chhattisgarh. 7 - Kamakhya Narayan Pandey S/o Late Janeshwar Pandey Aged About 51 Years R/o Darri Road Korba, Hal Mukam - Bajrang Chowk, Ratakhar, P.S. Korba District Korba Chhattisgarh. 8 - Sharanjeet Singh S/o Gurbhej Singh Aged About 38 Years R/o H.No. 182 Transport Nagar Korba, District - Korba Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Appellant : Mr. Dashrath Gupta, Advocate For Respondents 1 to 3 : Mr. Govind Dewangan, Advocate For Respondent 6 : Mr. Shivendu Pandya, Advocate SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment On Board 30.07 .2025 1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “Act of 1988”) has been preferred by the appellant (Insurance Company) challenging the impugned award dated 20/12/2021 passed by Learned 1st Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Katghora, District Korba in Claim Case No. 146/2018 whereby compensation to the tune of Rs. 60,77,199/- has been granted in favour of respondents No. 1 to 3/claimants for the death of Narayan Singh Thakur, aged about 55 years, who worked as a Fitter in SECL, and the appellant (Insurance Company) has been directed to first pay 50% of the compensation amount to respondents No. 1 to 3/claimants and thereafter, recover the said amount from respondents No. 7 and 8 herein. 2. Facts of the case, in brief, is that on 14/04/2018, at about 02:30 PM, deceased Narayan Singh Thakur was going from Kusmunda to Korba on his motorcycle when a motorcycle bearing Registration No. CG 12 A 7439, which was being driven by respondent No. 4 in a rash and negligent manner, came from the opposite direction and collided with his motorcycle due to which he fell on the road and at the same time, a Trailer vehicle bearing Registration No. CG 12 S 2014, which was being driven by respondent No. 7, also dashed him on account of which, he suffered grievous injuries and while undergoing treatment in SECL Hospital, Kusmunda, he died. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the Claims Tribunal has committed error in adding 10% bonus to the basic pay of the deceased and thereafter, assessing his monthly income. Deceased is said to be earning Rs. 2445/- per day and after adding 10% as bonus, the Claims Tribunal has taken his per day income to be Rs. 2,669/- which totals to Rs. 80,070/- as monthly income, which is not just and proper. He would further submit that even after finding that the offending motorcycle as well as the trailer vehicle were not duly insured and they were being plied in violation of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy on the date of the accident, the Claims Tribunal has still directed the appellant (Insurance Company) to pay 50% of the compensation amount to respondents No. 1 to 3/claimants which they can recover from respondents No. 7 and 8 which is unsustainable and bad in law, therefore, the impugned award is liable to be set aside. 4. Learned counsel for respondents No. 1 to 3/claimants would support the impugned award and submit that the instant appeal is liable to be dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their submissions and perused the record. 6. Learned Claims Tribunal, after appreciation of oral and documentary evidence on record, has clearly recorded a finding in paragraph 27 of the impugned judgment that witness on behalf of respondents No. 1 to 3/claimants namely Suresh Kumar Gupta (PW-3) has submitted the document (Ex. P/30) and clearly stated that for working three months regularly, deceased used to get 10% of basic pay as bonus, therefore, basic pay of deceased was Rs. 2245/- per day and after adding 10% i.e. Rs. 224/-, it would come to Rs. 2669/- per day and Rs. 80,070/- per month, which is a correct finding of fact based on evidence available on record and is neither perverse nor contrary to the record. 7. So far as the order of pay and recover passed by the learned Tribunal is concerned, it is absolutely in accordance with law in light of the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in the matter of National Insurance Company v. Swaran Singh1 wherein their Lordships of the Supreme Court have held that if the offending vehicle is plied in violation of the terms and conditions of insurance policy, deceased being third party, the Insurance company can pay the compensation amount to the claimants and thereafter, recover it from the driver and owner of the said vehicle. As such, I do not find any good ground for interference with the impugned award. 8. Accordingly, the instant appeal is liable to be and is hereby dismissed and the cross-objection filed by respondents No. 4 and 5 also stands dismissed. No cost(s). Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Harneet 1 2004 (3) SCC 297