1 2025:CGHC:46257 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 668 of 2024 1 - Yogesh Kumar Baghel S/o Late Firat Ram Baghel Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Ghathola, Police Station Akaltara, Dist. Janjgir Champa, C.G. Presently Residing At Village Bahtarai, Sarkanda, Police Station- Sarkanda, Tahsil And Dist. Bilaspur, C.G. ... Appellant(s) versus 1 - Suraj Prasad Nirmalkar S/o Bahru Ram Nirmalkar Aged About 35 Years Occupation Driver R/o Village Jhilmili, Police Station Mulmula, Dist. Janjgir- Champa, C.G. (Driver) 2 - Smt. Sangita Dubey W/o Anil Kumar Dubey R/o House No. 97, Shiv Lok Phase- 4, Khujari Kalyan Road, Bhopal, M.P. 462022 (Owner) 3 - The New India Insurance Company Limited Through Branch Manager, Branch Office, Second Floor, Rama Trade Centre, In Front Of Rajeev Plaza, Purana Bus Stand Road, Police Station Civil Line, Bilaspur Tahsil And Dist. Bilaspur, C.G. (Insurance Company) ... Respondent(s) For Appellant (s) : Shri Saurabh Sahu, Advocate For Respondent No.1 : Shri Ashok Swarnakar, Advocate For Respondent No.3 : Shri Samir Singh, Advocate ({Hon’ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput}) Order on Board 10/09/2025 This appeal has been filed by the appellant / claimant challenging the award 2 dated 05/01/2024 passed in claim case No.1119/2021 by the 2nd Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, District–Bilaspur, CG. By the impugned award, against a claim of Rs.39 lakhs, learned Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.645673/- in favour of the appellant/claimant on account of death of his father Firat Ram aged about 58 years in an accident that occurred on 17/03/2021 by rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle (car) bearing registration No. M.P.04-C.M.-2430 by respondent No.1, owned by respondent No.2 and insured with respondent No.3. 2. As per pleadings of the claim application, the deceased was aged about 58 years and was earning Rs.15,000/- per month by doing labour and agricultural work. Therefore, the aforestated compensation was claimed. 3. The insurance company denied the averments of the claim application return and took a plea that there is violation of the terms and conditions of the Motor Vehicle Act and the driver was not having valid and effective driving license. 4. On the basis of above pleadings, learned Claims Tribunal framed issues and decided the same in favour of the appellants / claimants and awarded the abovestated compensation. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the deceased was an agriculturist and pleading of income of Rs.15,000/- per month was made in the claim application, however, learned Tribunal assessed monthly income of Rs.9200/- per month which requires suitable enhancement. Otherwise, on all other aspect, the award is reasonable. 6. Opposing the above submission, Shri Samir Singh and Shri Swarnakar submit that the appellant / claimant is the son of the deceased aged 40 years, the agricultural land is still in existence and it cannot be said that a 40 year old son is dependent upon the income of his father. Even otherwise, just compensation has been awarded. 7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 3 8. No document with regard to agricultural land of the deceased is available on record. The deceased was aged about 58 years and the appellant is aged about 40 years. Learned Tribunal found the monthly income of the deceased to Rs.9200/- which appears to be based upon proper appreciation of evidence. The award on all other aspect including application of multiplier and award of parental consortium appears to be just. Therefore, this Court does not find any illegality or irregularity in the award passed by the Tribunal warranting interference. The appeal fails and is dismissed. Sd/- ({Sachin Singh Rajput}) JUDGE Deepti DEEPTI HARIKUMAR Digitally signed by DEEPTI HARIKUMAR Date: 2025.09.12 13:56:28 +0530