1 2025:CGHC:44425 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 446 of 2021 • Magma H.D.I. General Insurance Company Limited, Through Its Legal Manager, Branch Office Corporate Park, Plot No. 1, Block No. 09, Rajbandh Maidan, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh (Insurer). ... Appellant versus 1. Smt. Hemin Bai, W/o Mohan Lal Dehariya, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Village Tilda, P.S. Kasdol, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh (Claimant). 2. Ku. Lata, D/o Mohan Lal Dehariya, Aged About 6 Years Minor, Through Legal Representative Mother Smt. Hemin Bai, W/o Mohan Lal Dehariya, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Village Tilda, P.S. Kasdol, District Balodabazar- Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh (Claimant). 3. Khilesh, S/o Mohan Lal Dehariya, Aged About 4 Years Minor, W/o Mohan Lal Dehariya, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Village Tilda, P.S. Kasdol, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh (Claimant). 4. Prem Dehariya, S/o Mohan Lal Dehariya, Aged About 3 Years Minor, W/o Mohan Lal Dehariya, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Village Tilda, P.S. Kasdol, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh (Claimant). 5. Pahruram, S/o Baliram Dehariya, Aged About 53 Years, R/o Village Tilda, P.S. Kasdol, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh (Claimant). 6. Smt. Jamun Bai, W/o Pehruram, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Village Tilda, P.S. Kasdol, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh (Claimant). 7. Ayush Kumar Agrawal, S/o Lakeshwar Prasad Agrawal, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Ward 02, Mela Road, Mahant Para, Shivrinarayan, District Janjgir- Champa, Chhattisgarh (Owner). 8. Rajesh Yadav, S/o Gokul Yadav, Aged About 43 Years, Village Padepara Ward No.18, P.S. City Kotwali Balodabazar, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh (Driver). ... Respondents (Cause title taken from Case Information System) DEEPTI JHA Digitally signed by DEEPTI JHA 2 For Appellant : Ms. Harneet Kaur, counsel appears on behalf of Mr. Sourabh Sharma, Advocate. For Respondent No.8 : Mr. Tapan Kumar Chandra, counsel appears on behalf of Mr. T. K. Jha, Advocate. For Respondents No.1 to 7 : None. Hon’ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput Order on Board 01/09/2025 1. Heard on I.A. No.1/2021, application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal and I.A. No.2/2021, application for exemption from filing certified copy of order passed under Section 170 of M.V. Act, 1988. 2. On due consideration and for the reasons mentioned in the application, both the applications are allowed and the delay of 4 days in filing the appeal is hereby condoned and appellant is exempted from filing the certified copy of the order passed under Section 170 of M. V. Act, 1988. 3. With the consent of both the parties, this appeal is heard finally. 4. This an appeal filed by the insurance company, challenging the impugned award dated 02.01.2019 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, District Balodabazar in Motor Accident Claim Case No.51/2018. 5. By the impugned award, against the claim of Rs.37,00,000/-, the learned Claims Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.11,83,900/- in favour of the respondents No.1 to 6/claimants. 6. The instant appeal is filed only on the ground of excessive compensation having been awarded in their favour. 7. Learned for the appellant submits that the amount of compensation is on the higher side. She further submits that the compensation awarded under the head of filial and parental consortium is on higher side. The income of the deceased without prove has wrongly been assessed as Rs.4,725/-. 3 8. Learned counsel for the respondent No.8 submits that the dispute is between the appellant/insurance company and claimants. 9. I have learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of claim case. 10. In the claim application filed under Section 166 of the MV Act, it was pleaded by the respondents No.1 to 6/claimants that the deceased Mohan Lal was aged about 29 years and was earning Rs.4,500/- per month and thereby, they claimed the aforementioned compensation. 11. On appreciation of evidence, the learned Claims Tribunal has assessed the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.4,500/-, Thereafter, added 40% towards future prospects and after deduction of 1/4th, found the loss of dependency to Rs.9,63,900/- and thereafter, awarded Rs.40,000/- towards spousal consortium to appellant No.1, Rs.45,000/- to respondents No.2 to 4 (Rs.15,000 each) towards parental consortium and Rs.30,000/- to respondents No.5 & 6 for filial consortium and also awarded of Rs.90,000/- towards loss of estate (Rs.15,000/- each) and Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses, thus, total awarded Rs.11,83,900/-. The accident was reported to be on 27.12.2017, the widow, three minor children and parents were dependent upon the income of the deceased. 12. In the opinion of this Court, the aforesaid amount cannot be said to be excessive. This Court has to see just compensation as awarded, therefore, there is no illegality or infirmity found in the impugned award, hence the instant appeal is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge