1 2025:CGHC:16095 AFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1815 of 2018 1 - Smt. Savitri Bai W/o Late Bhagwati Prasad Aged About 54 Years R/o Gopi Mahaka, Kharsiya, Tehsil Kharsiya District- Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Sanju Kumar S/o Late Bhagwati Prasad Aged About 36 Years R/o Gopi Mahaka, Kharsiya, Tehsil Kharsiya District- Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Anil Kumar S/o Late Bhagwati Prasad Aged About 32 Years R/o Gopi Mahaka, Kharsiya, Tehsil Kharsiya District- Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Lalit Kumar S/o Late Bhagwati Prasad Aged About 30 Years R/o Gopi Mahaka, Kharsiya, Tehsil Kharsiya District- Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellants/Claimants versus 1 - Inderkumar Gabel S/o Baldev Kumar R/o S.E.C.L., Domnara Colony, P.O. Farkanara Tehsil Kharsiya District- Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. (Driver). 2 - The New India Insurance Company Through Branch Manager Office-Branch Office, Near Satigudi Chowk, Raigarh, Tehsil And District- Raigarh, Chhattisgarh (Insurance Company). ... Respondents For Appellants : Mr. Amit Sharma, Advocate For Respondents : None Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2025.04.05 12:58:30 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board ( 02 . 04 .202 5 ) 1. This appeal arises out of the award dated 04.09.2018 passed by 1st Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raigarh (C.G.), in Claim Case No. 94/2014 whereby a compensation of Rs. 50,000/- has been awarded with interest @ 09% per annum, in favour of the appellants/claimants for their irreparable loss. 2. The averment in the claim petition, in brief, was that Bhagwati Prasad was posted as X-ray Operator in Civil Hospital, Kharsiya. On 19.01.2013 at about 1:00 pm, when he was going to his house for lunch from hospital, at that time, respondent No.1, driver of offending vehicle bearing engine No. 10-A-B-5-Z-122770089, drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and dashed the deceased Bhagwati Prasad, due to which he sustained grievous injuries. Thereafter, Bhagwati Prasad was admitted to Kharsiya Hospital, from where he was referred to Jindal Hospital, Raigarh. In the hospital, he was admitted from 19.01.2013 to 30.01.2013 and from 06.02.2013 to 08.02.2013, and his hand was operated. On the basis of complaint, crime was registered against the driver/respondent No.1 of the vehicle. Hence, a claim application of Rs. 5,84,400/- was filed by Bhagwati Prasad, 3 but during the pendency of the claim application, he died on 10.03.2016, therefore, Bhagwati Prasad was represented by his legal heirs i.e. claimants/appellants. 3. In the award passed by the Tribunal on the basis of the pleadings of the parties and the evidence adduced thereof and the statement of appellant Lalit Kumar (AW-1) it was found that his father got himself treated at his own expenses, thus, the personal right to compensation for one's own pain and bodily injury ended with the death of the deceased claimant. Hence, Rs. 10,000/- towards expenses for the attendant and Rs.10,000/ - 10,000/- for mental agony to the four claimants has been awarded. Thus, a total compensation of Rs. 50,000/- has been awarded in favour of the claimants, and the Respondent No. 2 insurance company was held liable to pay the compensation amount to the claimants. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant argues that it is evident from Exs.P-18, P-19 and P-21 that deceased Bhagwati Prasad was admitted in Jindal Hospital for 8 days (i.e. from 06.02.2013 to 08.02.2013, from 20.02.2014 to 22.02.2014 and from 11.07.2014 to 12.07.2014) and underwent treatment and suffered mental agony for a long time. He also submits that due to the said accident, the deceased suffered grievous injuries and later on he died on 4 10.03.2016 on account of injuries sustained by him. The learned Tribunal has not considered the medical expenses borne by the deceased and has not awarded any compensation on that account. Therefore, the compensation amount may be enhanced suitably. 5. No one appeared on behalf of the respondents during final hearing of this case. 6. Heard counsel for the appellant and perused the documents available on record. 7. From perusal of the entire material available on record, particularly, looking to the discharge ticket (Exs.P-18, P-19 and P-21) it is clear that the deceased was admitted in Jindal Hospital for about 8 days and underwent treatment. But during the pendency of claim application, he died on 10.03.2016, and he was substituted by his legal heirs. However, it is not proved by any documentary evidence that the deceased Bhagwati Prasad died due to the injuries sustained by him in the said accident. 8. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Oriental Insurance Company Limited vs. Kahlon alias jasmail Singh Kahlon (deceased) Through His Legal Representative narinder Kahlon Gosakan and another, reported in 2021 CJ (SC) 752 has clearly held that the claim for personal injury filed under Section 166 of the MV 5 Act would not survive to the legal representatives on the death of the claimant except the claim for pecuniary loss to the estate of the claimant. In para-10 of the said judgment it has been observed as under: “10. In Umed Chand Golcha vs. Dayaram and Others, 2002 (1) MPLJ 249, giving a broad liberal interpretation to the provisions of the Act so that legal representatives do not suffer injustice, it was observed that the claim for personal injuries will not survive on death of the injured unrelated to the accident but the legal representatives could pursue the claim for enhancement of the claim for loss of the estates which would include expenditure on medical expenses, travelling, attendant, diet, doctor’s fee and reasonable monthly annual accretion to the estate for a certain period. It is trite that the income which a person derives compositely forms part of the expenditure on himself, his family and the savings go to the estate. The unforeseen expenses as aforesaid naturally have to be met from the estate causing pecuniary loss to the estate.” 9. The Tribunal has given Rs.40,000 to the four claimants (Rs.10,000 to each claimant) for mental agony. It is an injury case. Compensation for mental agony is given to the injured who suffered injuries in the accident and not to the heirs of the injured. The heirs of the injured are entitled for pecuniary loss of the estate such as medical expenses, travelling, attendant, diet etc. 10. Looking to the medical bills submitted by the claimants, it is clear that the injured has spent Rs.1,60,813/- in his 6 medical expenses and the claimants are his legal heirs. Hence, in light of the above judgment, the claim for personal injuries will not survive on death of the injured, and therefore, the claimants are found entitled for the compensation in the following manner:- Heads Compensation Medical expenses 1,60,813/- Physical and Mental Agony to the injured 40,000/- Nutritious Food, Assistant and transport expenses 20,000/- Total Rs. 2,20,813/- 11. Thus, the total compensation is recomputed as Rs. 2,20,813/-. 12. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. The claimants/appellants shall be entitled to Rs. 1,70,813/- (2,20,813-50,000) in addition to what has already been awarded by the claims Tribunal as compensation. The enhanced amount shall carry interest @ 6% from the date of enhancement of the award till its realization. The impugned award stands modified to the above extent and the rest of the conditions shall remain intact. 13. The Registry is further directed to communicate the claimant in writing “the enhanced amount” in this appeal as against the award made by the Tribunal below. The said communication be made in Hindi Deonagri language and 7 the help of paralegal workers may be availed with a co- ordination of Secretary, Legal Aid of the concerned area wherein the claimants reside. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge H.L. Sahu