THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED v. SMT. CHITRAREKHA
MAC/1458/2022 · 2025-07-29
Shri Sanjay K Agrawal
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 44840 (CHH) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 44840 (CHH) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1 MAC No. 1458 of 2022
2025:CGHC:37225
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1458 of 2022 The New India Assurance Company Limited (Wrongly Mentioned Insurance), by Branch Manager, Branch Office Rama Trade Center Opposite 2nd floor, in front of Rajiv Plaza, Old Bus Stand, P.S. Civil Line, District – Bilaspur (C.G.) (Insurance Company) through Authorized Signatory Manager, Suit Claim Hub Office, 2nd floor Rama Trade Center Opposite Rajiv Plaza, Old Bus Stand Road Bilaspur (C.G.)
.. Appellant versus
1. Smt. Chitrarekha Wd/o Late Devendra Banjare, aged about 30 years;
2. Minor Kumkum Banjare D/o Late Devendra Banjare, aged about 17 years;
3. Minor Archana Banjare D/o Late Devendra Banjare, aged about 13 years;
4. Minor Ku. Riya Banjare D/o Late Devendra Banjare, aged about 9 years; Respondents No. 2 to 4 are minor through natural guardian mother Smt. Chitrarekha Banjare Res. No. 1. ANKIT KUMAR SINGH Digitally signed by ANKIT KUMAR SINGH Date: 2025.08.05 17:58:21 +0530
2 MAC No. 1458 of 2022 All above R/o Village Bahesar, P.S. Tilda, District Raipur (C.G.), Presently R/o Omnagar Jarhabhatha Bilaspur P.S. Civil Line, District Bilaspur (C.G.). …. (Claimants)
5. Vinod Kumar S/o Channu Shrivash, aged about 33 years, R/o Ward No. 1, Bilha, P.S. Bilha, District-Bilaspur (C.G.). …. (Driver)
6. Udal Singh S/o Late Duklha Singh Rajput, R/o Village Umaria, P.S. Bilha, District Bilaspur (C.G.). …. (Owner)
... Respondents For Appellant :- Mr. B. N. Nande, Advocate. For Respondents :- None SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment On Board 30.07
.2025
1. The appellant has preferred this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “Act of 1988”) against the impugned award dated 16.09.2022 passed by the 1st Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh (for short “Claims Tribunal”) in M.A.C.C No. 1315/2019, by which compensation of ₹77,26,659/- has been awarded to the dependents of
deceased Devendra Kumar Banjare by fastening the liability upon the Insurance Company/appellant herein to pay the aforesaid compensation to the dependents of the deceased. 3 MAC No. 1458 of 2022
2. Mr.
B.N. Nande, learned counsel for the appellant, would submit that the learned Claims Tribunal has committed gross error in granting compensation compensation amount of 77,26,659/- to the claimants without appreciating the ₹
fact of contributory negligence on the part of deceased Devendra Kumar Banjare, therefore, 50% of compensation awarded to the claimants be deducted on account of contributory negligence. 3. None for the respondents, though served. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and gone through the records with utmost circumspection. 5. In the instant case, the only plea taken by the Insurance Company/appellant herein, is contributory negligence. However, a careful perusal of para 16 of the written statement of would show the plea taken by the Insurance Company that if claimants are entitled for amount of compensation, then the Insurance Company is only liable to pay 50% of the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal on the basis of contributory negligence. Surprisingly, no evidence has been led by the Insurance
4 MAC No. 1458 of 2022 Company in support of its plea of contributory negligence. The Insurance Company has examined Dr. Sumit Soni, Senior Assistant, but he did not state anything with regard to contributory negligence on the part of deceased Devendra Kumar Banjare and further stress has been laid on the statement of Ramnath Patel (PW-2) who has stated that the bike of the deceased was slipped due to which it collided with the pick-up/offending vehicle. However, such a statement cannot absolve the Insurance Company from its liability and also only on the basis of said statement, the Insurance Company cannot run from its liability, as such, the Insurance Company has failed to establish its plea of contributory negligence. 6. In view of the above, I do not find any merit in the instant appeal. Accordingly it deserves to be and is hereby dismissed. No order as to cost(s). Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Ankit