1 2025:CGHC:29858 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1872 of 2019 The New India Assurance Company Limited Through Its Divisional Manager, Divisional Office - Chauhan- Plaza, Near Power House, Bhiali, Tah. And Distt. - Durg Chhattisgarh....(Non Applicant No 2), District : Durg, Chhattisgarh --- Appellant versus 1 - Smt. Sushila Bai Wd/o Late Sundar Aged About 60 Years R/o Atal Aawas Dhamtari, Tah. And Distt. Dhamtari Chhattisgarh 2 - Smt. Anusuiya Bai Wd/o Late Suresh Aged About 35 Years 3 - Shivkumar S/o Late Suresh Aged About 12 Years Through His Mother Smt. - Anusuiya Bai Wd/o Late Suresh No.2 and 2 both are R/o Village - Tarra, Tah. - Patan Distt. - Durg Chhattisgarh. 4 - B.S. Dewangan S/o B.R. Dewangan Aged About 57 Years R/o Van Parisar Durg Tah. And Distt. Durg Chhattisgarh. --- Respondents For Appellant : Mr. Dashrath Gupta, Advocate For Respondents No.1 to 3 : Mr. Kunal Das, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order On Board 02/07/2025 1. Appellant/Insurance Company has filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short ‘the Act of 1988’) challenging the quantum of impugned award dated 14.05.2019, passed in Claim Case No. 890 of 2014, whereby the learned Motor Accident Claims BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN Digitally signed by BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN Date: 2025.07.14 10:55:38 +0530 2 Tribunal, Dhamtari, District – Dhamtari has awarded Rs.8,15,900/- as compensation in a death case. 2. Facts relevant for disposal of this appeal are that claimants/respondents No.1 to 3 filed an application under Section 163A of the Act of 1988 claiming total compensation of Rs.13,00,000/- under different heads on account of the death of Santu @ Rajesh Shrivastava, who died in a road accident pleading therein that in the intervening night of 14th and 15th May 2010, at around 1:00 to 1:30 AM, Suresh, along with his friends, was travelling in a Maruti car bearing registration number CG-07/M/8999. The car was being driven by Santu alias Rajesh Srivastava, who, while driving in a rash and negligent manner, lost control and the vehicle collided with a roadside tree. As a result, the driver, Santu alias Rajesh Kumar Srivastava, and the other occupants Devanand Nemwani, Krishna Gond, and Suresh Sweeper died on the spot. It was stated in the claim application that at the time of the accident, the deceased Santu alias Rajesh Kumar Srivastava was employed as a clerk in a rice mill at Dhamtari and was earning of ₹40,000/- per annum. 3. The non-applicants No.2 filed his reply to the claim application and resisted the claim. It was pleaded that at the time of accident, deceased Santu @ Rajesh Shrivastava was not having any valid and effective driving license to drive the vehicle. The vehicle was being plied in a rash and negligent manner, which collided with road side tree. 4. The learned Claims Tribunal after appreciation of the pleadings and the evidence brought on record by respective parties, allowed the 3 claim application in part and awarded total compensation of Rs.8,15,900/-. 5. Learned counsel for appellant/Insurance Company submits that this appeal is filed solely on the ground that the learned Claims Tribunal erred in awarding Rs.8,15,900/- as total compensation instead of fixed amount of Rs.5,00,000/- over looking the application seeking compensation was filed under the provisions of Section 163A of the Act, 1988. It is further contended that though the accident is in the intervening night of 14-15.05.2010, even if the amended provision under Section 163A or Section 164 of the Act, 1988 is made applicable to the facts of the case, the compensation to be awarded to the claimant would be only Rs.5,00,000/- at the most and prays for modification of the impugned award. He further submits that as the appellant/Insurance Company is not challenging the liability fastened upon the appellant/Insurance Company, there is no requirement of service of notice upon respondent No.4/owner. Claimants are representing through their counsel, who may be affected parties, if the appeal is allowed. 6. Learned counsel for the respondent No.1 to 3/claimants opposes the submission of learned counsel for appellant/Insurance Company and would submit that the learned Claims Tribunal upon appreciation of the facts as also the evidence available on record has passed the well reasoned award, hence, it does not call for any interference. He however, do not dispute the submission of learned counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company that application was filed under the provisions of Section 163-A of the Act, 1988. 4 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records of claim case. 8. Perusal of the record would show that claimants have filed an application seeking compensation of Rs.13,00,000/- under the provisions Section 163-A of the Act, 1988 showing the income of the deceased as Rs.40,000/- per annum. Provisions under Section 163-A of the Act, 1988 is special provision under pre- amended Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, which reads as under :- “Section 163A. Special provisions as to payment of compensation on structured formula basis.— (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or in any other law for the time being in force or instrument having the force of law, the owner of the motor vehicle of the authorised insurer shall be liable to pay in the case of death or permanent disablement due to accident arising out of the use of motor vehicle, compensation, as indicated in the Second Schedule, to the legal heirs or the victim, as the case may be. Explanation.—For the purposes of this sub-section, “permanent disability” shall have the same meaning and extent as in the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 (8 of 1923). (2) In any claim for compensation under sub-section (1), the claimant shall not be required to plead or establish that the death or permanent disablement in respect of which the claim has been made was due to any wrongful act or neglect or default of the owner of the vehicle or vehicles concerned or of any other person. (3) The Central Government may, keeping in view the cost of living by notification in the Official Gazette, from time to time amend the Second Schedule.” 9. From the heading of the provisions itself, it is apparent that provision under Section 163 A is special provision for payment of compensation on structured formula basis. The claimants filed an application under 5 the aforementioned provisions is/are not required to prove the negligence on the part of the deceased or injured. 10. The second scheduled under the provision of Section 163-A of the Act, 1988 came to be amended vide order dated 22.05.2018. In the amended provisions for fatal accident, the compensation payable in death case has been fixed as Rs.5,00,000/-. Further the Motor Vehicle Act came to be amended w.e.f. 09.08.2019 wherein the provisions of Section 163A was omitted and benefit of Section 163A has been brought in under Section 164 of the Act, 1988. Section 164 of the Act, 1988 is extracted below for ready reference :- “Section 164. Payment of compensation in case of death or grevious hurt, etc. -- (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or in any other law for the time being in force or instrument having the force of law, the owner of the motor vehicle or the authorised insurer shall be liable to pay in the case of death or grievous hurt due to any accident arising out of the use of motor vehicle, a compensation, of a sum of five lakh rupees in case of death or of two and a half lakh rupees in case of grievous hurt to the legal heirs or the victim, as the case may be. (2) In any claim for compensation under sub-section (1), the claimant shall not be required to plead or establish that the death or grievous hurt in respect of which the claim has been made was due to any wrongful act or neglect or default of the owner of the vehicle or of the vehicle concerned or of any other person. (3) Where, in respect of death or grievous hurt due to an accident arising out of the use of motor vehicle, compensation has been paid under any other law for the time being in force, such amount of compensation shall be reduced from the amount of compensation payable under this section.” 11. In the facts of the case, where the claimants seeking compensation against the death of driver of the vehicle against the owner and 6 Insurance Company of the said vehicle filed under Section 163-A without proving the negligence then there should be strict compliance of the provisions under Section 163A or Section 164 of the Act, 1988 for awarding the amount of compensation. The claimants would be entitled only for the compensation as fixed under the aforementioned referred provision. Learned Claims Tribunal erred in computing the amount of compensation by applying the multiplier system and adding of 40% towards future prospects, which is not permissible in law under the provisions of Section 163-A or 164 of the Act, 1988. According to the amended provision of Section 163-A of the Act, 1988, the income of the deceased in application under Section 163-A of the Act, 1988 cannot be more than Rs.40,000/- and accordingly, the claimants have pleaded the income of the deceased as Rs.40,000/- per annum in the application. 12. The effect of amendment in the Ac, 1988 which is brought in w.e.f. 22.05.2018 whether will apply to the cases filed or accident prior to coming into force of the amendment has been considered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Urmila Halder, reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 4983 and observed that beneficial legislation would necessarily entail the benefit to be passed on to the claimant in absence of any specific bar to the same. The Act, 1988 is beneficial piece of legislation, therefore, the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court giving benefit of amended provision under Section 163A of the Act, 1988 would apply to the facts of the case and accordingly, the claimants will be entitled for total compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-. 7 13. For the forgoing discussions the amount of compensation awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal is required to be reduced to Rs.5,00,000/- as under the provision of Section 163-A of the Act, 1988, the maximum amount is fixed as Rs.5,00,000/-. 14. Now the claimants will be entitled for total sum of Rs.5,00,000/-. The aforementioned amount of compensation shall carry interest at the rate of 7.5% from the date of filing of the claim application till its realization. Other conditions of the award shall remain intact. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Balram