Page No.1 of 5 IN MAC-1423-2022 2025:CGHC:39941 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1423 of 2022 [Arising out of award dated 15.09.2022 passed by the 2nd Addl. Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Durg (CG) in Claim Case No.01/2022] 1 - Jayanti Mala Dewangan Wd/o Late Kundan Dewangan Aged About 34 Years R/o Ward No. 01, Parsahi, Bhatagaon- R, Tahsil Gunderdehi (Claimants), District : Balod, Chhattisgarh 2 - Shivam Dewangan S/o Late Kundan Dewangan Aged About 8 Years R/o Ward No. 01, Parsahi, Bhatagaon- R, Tahsil Gunderdehi (Applicant No. 2 Is Minor Through Natural Guardian Mother Jayanti Mala Dewangan), District : Balod, Chhattisgarh 3 - Hari Ram Dewangan S/o Late Boharik Aged About 58 Years R/o Ward No. 01, Parsahi, Bhatagaon- R, Tahsil Gunderdehi, District : Balod, Chhattisgarh 4 - Purnima Bai Dewangan W/o Hari Ram Aged About 47 Years R/o Ward No. 01, Parsahi, Bhatagaon- R, Tahsil Gunderdehi, District : Balod, Chhattisgarh 5 - Koushal Dewangan S/o Hari Ram Aged About 30 Years R/o Ward No. 01, Parsahi, Bhatagaon- R, Tahsil Gunderdehi, District : Balod, Chhattisgarh ... Appellants/ Claimants Versus 1 - Puranik Sahu S/o Jayant Sahu Aged About 30 Years R/o Manikchauri, Utai Police Station Utai, Tahsil And (Driver), District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 2 - Baba Ramdev Industrial Through Dhanesh Kumar Damani R/o Ward No. 17, H. No. 29, Nagar Nigam Colony, Near Agrasen Chowk, Samta Colony, Raipur Tahsil And (Owner), District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - United India Insurance Company Limited Through Zonal Manager, Office At Paras Complex, Station Road, Near Gurudvara, Tahsil And (Insurer), District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents SAIFAN KHAN Digitally signed by SAIFAN KHAN Page No.2 of 5 IN MAC-1423-2022 [Cause-title taken from Case Information System (CIS)] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Appellants : Mr. Utsav Mahiswar, Advocate For Respondents No.1-2 : None though served. For Respondent No.3 : Mrs. Swati Agrawal, Advocate ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Single Bench: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal (Order on Board) 08.08.2025 1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short the “Act of 1988”) has been preferred by the appellants/claimants seeking enhancement of amount of compensation, challenging the impugned award dated 15.09.2022 passed by the 2nd Addl. Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Durg (CG) in Claim Case No.01/2022, whereby learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.20,37,640/- as compensation for the death of Kundan Dewangan. 2. Facts of the case, relevant for disposal of this appeal, are that on the date of occurrence i.e. 03.12.2021, while deceased- Kundan Lal Dewangan was working in the plant of respondents No.01 & 02 i.e. Damani Crusher Mine, situated at Village Gondependri and at about 03:30 PM while doing the work of stone crusher, the deceased met with an accident due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by the respondent No.01 and, as a consequence of which, the deceased suffered injuries and died. Thereafter, the appellants, who are wife, minor son, father, mother and brother of the deceased respectively, filed an application under Section 166 of the Act of 1988 seeking compensation to the tune of Rs.71,40,000/- pleading therein that on the Page No.3 of 5 IN MAC-1423-2022 date of the accident, the deceased was 35 years of age and used to earn Rs.20,000/- PM from his work. The deceased used to maintain his family members including the parents and after his death, his family members have no any source of income to survive. Even otherwise, the deceased was aged about 35 years on the date of accident and was a able-bodied person and on account of his untimely death in the accident, the appellants have suffered economical and psychological difficulties. 3. Respondents No.1 & 02 – driver and owner of the offending vehicle submitted their reply to the claim application, while denying all the adverse pleadings made in the application, it was further pleaded that the accident was not caused by the aforesaid vehicle and the deceased has died on account of his own carelessness, moreover, on the date of the accident, the driver of the said vehicle was having valid driving license as well as the said vehicle (stone crusher machine) was duly insured with respondent No.3, therefore, the liability of compensation lies upon the Insurance Company i.e. respondent No.3. 4. Respondent No. 3 i.e. the Insurance Company has opposed the claim application stating that the said vehicle (stone crusher machine) was being used in violation of terms and conditions of insurance policy. 5. Learned Claims Tribunal, upon appreciation of pleadings and evidence placed on record by respective parties, held that deceased Kundan Lal Dewangan died in the accident arising out of rash and negligent driving of the aforesaid vehicle i.e. stone crusher machine, Page No.4 of 5 IN MAC-1423-2022 which was driven by respondent No.01 and owned by respondent No.02 herein. Breach of conditions of insurance policy was not found to be proved, and after calculating the amount of compensation, awarded Rs. 20,37,640/- as total compensation with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing of claim application. 6. Learned counsel for the appellants would submit that learned Claims Tribunal has erred in awarding less amount of compensation in the facts of the case. Claims Tribunal erred in not awarding any compensation under the head of ‘loss of consortium (for son & mother)’ i.e. appellants No.02 & 4 herein, therefore, the instant appeal be allowed and the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal may suitably be enhanced. 7. Learned counsel for the respondents would submit that the Tribunal is justified in assessing income of deceased on notional basis and the amount of compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is just and proper which does not call for any interference. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection. 9. In the instant case, though a sum of Rs.44,000/- has been awarded by the Tribunal to appellants No.1, 03 & 05 as loss of respective consortium, but no amount towards loss consortium for the appellant No.02 & 04 has been awarded, whereas they are also entitled Page No.5 of 5 IN MAC-1423-2022 to get Rs.44,000/- as filial & parental consortium. 10. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs.20,37,640/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 21,25,640/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs.20,37,640/-, the appellants are held entitled for an additional amount of Rs.88,000/-. The concerned respondents are directed to deposit the amount of compensation as enhanced by this Court within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of claim application before the Tribunal i.e. 01.01.2022 till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. 11. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed in part and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge s@if