1 2025:CGHC:43962 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 669 of 2021 1 - Kendal Nagesh Wd/o Lagan @ Semi, Aged About 60 Years R/o Village Dumardih, Police Station And Tahsil Dhourpur, District Sarguja Chhattisgarh. 2 - Dhalku, S/o Lagan @ Semi, Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Dumardih, Police Station And Tahsil Dhourpur, District Sarguja Chhattisgarh. 3 - Lalsai, S/o Late Lagan @ Semi, Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Dumardih, Police Station And Tahsil Dhourpur, District Sarguja Chhattisgarh. ... Appellants versus 1 - Moh. Ibrahim S/o Moh. Rafik Khan, Aged About 35 Years R/o Village And Post Lundra, District Sarguja (Chhattisgarh)............(Occupation Driver Of Vehicle). 2 - Shiv Prasad Yadav S/o Jagwa, Aged About 47 Years R/o Village Chalgali, P.S. And Tahsil Lundra, District Sarguja Chhattisgarh............(Occupation Owner Of Vehicle). 3 - Branch Manager, Hdfc General Insurance Company Limited, Branch Office Chawla Complex, 3rd Floor, Devendra Nagar, Sai Nagar Raipur Chhattisgarh.............(Insurer Of Alleged Vehicle). ... Respondents For Appellants : Mr. Ajit Yadav, Advocate For Res. No. 3 : Mr. Ashish Pandey, Advocate holding brief of Mr. N. K. Thakur, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput Judgment On Board 29/08/2025 1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short ‘M.V.Act’) has been filed by the claimants as they are aggrieved 2 by the award dated 11.08.2021 passed by the learned Second Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ambikapur, District Sarguja (C.G.) (for short, the Tribunal) in Claim Case No. 75 of 2020. 2. By the impugned award, learned Tribunal has awarded Rs 4,62,000/- in favour of the appellants/claimants as compensation on account of death of deceased- Lagan Ram @ Semi who died due to an unfortunate road accident that took place on 17.12.2019 caused by rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle i.e. Tractor bearing registration No. C.G.-15DQ/6675 by respondent No.1/driver. The said vehicle is owned by respondent No. 2 and insured with respondent No.3 / insurance company. 3. The appellants / claimants filed an application under Section 166 of the MV Act claiming compensation to the tune of Rs 19,50,000/- alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. As per pleadings in the claim application, at the time of accident, the deceased was aged about 50 years and in one month, he used to work as Mason for about 25 days and was earning Rs. 300/- per day, as such, he was earning Rs. 7,500/- per month and the appellants/claimants, who are the wife and the children of the deceased were totally dependent upon the income of the deceased. Therefore, the above said compensation was claimed. 4. Respondent No.1/driver and respondent No. 2/owner of the offending vehicle resisted the claim application on various grounds and Respondent No.3 / insurance company took a plea that on the date of accident, the driver was not having valid and effective driving license and there was a breach of terms and conditions of the insurance policy, therefore, the insurance company was not liable to pay 3 compensation. 5. On the basis of above broad pleadings, the learned Tribunal framed issues, decided those issues in favour of the appellants / claimants and awarded aforestated compensation. 6. The learned counsel for the appellants submits that the amount of compensation awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal is on the lower side which deserves to be enhanced suitably. 7. Learned counsel for the respondent No. 3/Insurance Company supports the order impugned and would submit that the award passed by the learned Claims Tribunal is just and proper which needs no interference by this Court. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions and perused the records. 9. Admittedly, the deceased died in an accident that occurred on 17.12.2019. It has to be seen that in the claim application, the age of the appellant No. 1, who is the wife of the deceased is shown to be 60 years and their two sons were shown to be 35 and 25 years therefore, the finding recorded by the learned Tribunal that at the time of incident the deceased was aged about 62 years can not be found fault with. So far as the assessment of income of the deceased as Rs. 7000/-p.m. is concerned, the learned Tribunal has relied upon the matter of Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Bhagwati Sahu and Ors. reported in 2017 (3) SCCD 1695 (CG), wherein the income of the deceased was found to be Rs. 7,000/- therefore, the finding with respect to the income of the deceased, in absence of any documentary evidence filed by the claimants, also appears to be based on proper appreciation of 4 the facts situation of the case and as such, the same also stands affirmed. Apart from this, the Tribunal has further awarded Rs. 40,000/- for consortium, Rs. 5,000/- for funeral expense and Rs. 15,000/- for loss of estate which is based upon the judgment of National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi and ors, (2017) 16 SCC 680 which, in the considered opinion of this Court, is also just and proper warranting no interference. However, in light of the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram and ors., (2018) 18 SCC 130, this Court is inclined to award Rs. 40,000/- each as parental consortium to appellant No. 2 and 3. Therefore the award is modified to the extent that appellant No. 2 and 3 are entitled to additional Rs. 40,000/- each i.e. Rs. 80,000/- as loss of parental consortium. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the amount of Rs. 80,000/- within a period of 60 days from today. On deposit being made, the learned Claims Tribunal shall pass the order with regard to the disbursement of the enhanced amount to appellant Nos. 2 and 3 equally. 10.Resultantly, the appeal stands partly allowed. Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput ) Judge Ami AMITA DUBEY Digitally signed by AMITA DUBEY Date: 2025.09.04 17:29:53 +0530