1 / 3 2025:CGHC:40581 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1061 of 2020 • Smt. Vijay Laxmi Wd/o Umanath Thakur, Aged About 62 Years Permanent R/o Rajeev Nagar Durg, District Durg (C.G.) At Present R/o. C/o. Preeti Jha, Purani Basti, Qtr. No. 27 / 259, Thakur Para, Ward No. 61, Raipur, Police Station Purani Basti, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. Mob. No. 9329670094. --- Appellant/ Applicant-claimant versus 1. Bharat Soni, S/o Pawan Soni, C/o. Trivendra Son Of Govardhan Kunjam, 49, Ward No. 3, Mahadeo Para, Tarasgaon, Kanker, Police Station Kanker, District Kanker (C.G.) (Driver of offending Vehicle No. C G - 04, C T – 9000) 2. Trivendra S/o Govardhan Kunjam, 49, Ward No. 3, Mahadeo Para, Tarasgaon, Kanker, Police Station Kanker, District Kanker (C.G.) (Owner of offending Vehicle No. C G - 04, C T – 9000) 3. Megma H D I General Insurance Company Limited, Through - Incharge Officer, Megma H D I General Insurance Company Limited, Dainik Bhaskar Complex, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. (Insurer of offending Vehicle No. C G - 04, C T - 9000) --- Respondents/ Non-applicants (cause title is taken from Case Information System) ____________________________________________________________ For Appellants : Mr. Sunil Pandey, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Uttam Pandey, Advocate For Respondent No. 3 : Mr. Mehul Kumar Garg, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Ghanshyam Patel, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Judgment On Board 12/08/2025 1. Appellant/ claimant has filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “Act of 1988”) challenging the impugned award PAWAN KUMAR JHA Digitally signed by PAWAN KUMAR JHA 2 / 3 dated 07.11.2019 passed by Learned Chief Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh (for short “Claims Tribunal”) in Claim Case No. 503/2018, whereby learned Claims Tribunal allowed the application filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 in part and awarded total sum of ₹ 5,00,000/- as compensation in a motor accidental injury case with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing of claim application till its realization and fastened first liability to satisfy the amount of compensation upon non-applicant No. 3-insurance company. 2. This appeal filed by the claimant seeking enhancement of amount of compensation as awarded by the Claims Tribunal. The factum of motor accident occurred on 24.06.2018 at about 02:30 a.m. in night, involvement of vehicle car bearing number CG04-CT-9000 (hereinafter referred to as “offending car”) owned by non-applicant No. 2, driven by non-applicant No. 1, as well as the liability of insurer- non-applicant No. 3- to satisfy the compensation amount as determined, are matters which are otherwise not disputed by the parties before this Court. 3. In view of above admitted position, this Court does not deem it necessary to once again traverse the entire factual matrix of the accident as set out in the claim application, reply filed by non-applicants thereof, and further adverted in the impugned award. The present adjudication is, therefore, confined solely to the limited issue of the claimant’s grievance with respect to the interest awarded on quantum of compensation. The Court will accordingly examine only the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the respective parties. 4. Learned counsel for appellant-claimant would submit that this appeal is filed only on the ground that the Claims Tribunal has awarded interest from the date of filing of claim application and not from the date of accident. In support 3 / 3 of his contention, he places reliance upon the decision of this Court passed in MAC No. 1215/2014 dated 13.03.2015. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for Respondent No. 3 would oppose the submission of counsel for appellant and would further submit that the Claims Tribunal has awarded interest from the date of presentation of claim application which is in accordance with the provisions under Section 171 of the Act of 1988 and therefore in view of the grounds raised in this appeal and argued before this Court, appellant is not entitle for the interest from the date of accident. 6. Considered the submission of learned counsel for the respective parties. 7. Provision under Section 171 of the Act of 1988 provides for award of interest where any claim is allowed. It specifically provides that simple interest to be paid from such date not earlier than the date of making the claim as it may specify in this behalf. This provision clearly envisages the award of interest not earlier than the date of filing of claim application. 8. In the case at hand, Tribunal has awarded interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing of claim application, which cannot be said to be erroneous. 9. The decision which is relied upon by the learned counsel for appellant is a case arising out of Workmen Compensation Act, 1923. Therefore, the said decision will not be applicable to the facts of present case. 10. For the foregoing discussion, I do not find any good ground in this appeal. Appeal being sans merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed accordingly. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge pwn