1 (MAC No. 13 of 2023) 2025:CGHC:40189 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 13 of 2023 1 - Branch Manager, National Insurance Company Limited Branch Office, Kosabadi Main Road, Korba, Tahsil And District Korba (C.G.) (Insurer Of Vehicle) --- Appellant(s) versus 1 - Saliha Fatima D/o Late Mohd. Nasib Qureshi Aged About 23 Years R/o Village Gondpara, Kotmisonar, Police Station And Tahsil Akaltara, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) (Claimants) 2 - Sayarabano D/o Late Mohd. Nasib Qureshi Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Gondpara, Kotmisonar, Police Station And Tahsil Akaltara, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) (Claimants) 3 - Jahira Begam D/o Late Mohd. Nasib Qureshi Aged About 34 Years R/o Village Gondpara, Kotmisonar, Police Station And Tahsil Akaltara, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) (Claimants) 4 - Tahira Naaj D/o Late Mohd. Nasib Qureshi Aged About 33 Years R/o Village Gondpara, Kotmisonar, Police Station And Tahsil Akaltara, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) (Claimants) 5 - Najiya Fatima D/o Late Mohd. Nasib Qureshi Aged About 28 Years R/o Village Gondpara, Kotmisonar, Police Station And Tahsil Akaltara, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) (Claimants) 6 - Mohammad Umar S/o Late Mohd. Nasib Qureshi Aged About 32 Years R/o Village Gondpara, Kotmisonar, Police Station And Tahsil Akaltara, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) (Claimants) 7 - Sadika Fatima D/o Late Mohd. Nasib Qureshi Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Gondpara, Kotmisonar, Police Station And Tahsil Akaltara, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) (Claimants) ADITI DIWAN KAIWART Digitally signed by ADITI DIWAN KAIWART Date: 2025.08.13 10:33:02 +0530 2 (MAC No. 13 of 2023) 8 - Mohammad Haidar S/o Late Mohd. Nasib Qureshi Aged About 29 Years R/o Village Gondpara, Kotmisonar, Police Station And Tahsil Akaltara, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) (Claimants) 9 - Lakhan Singh Gond S/o Chammasram Aged About 35 Years R/o Wahan Part, Police Station Kusmunda, District Korba, Presently Residing At Pantora, Police Station And Tahsil Baloda, District Janjgir Champa (C.G.) (Non-Applicant No. 1) Driver Of Vehicle 10 - Mohammad Mansur Khan S/o Habib Khan Aged About 36 Years R/o Dipka, Ward No. 5, Korba, Police Station And Tahsil Katghora, District Korba (C.G.) (Non-Applicant No. 2) (Owner Of Vehicle) --- Respondent(s) For Appellants :- Mr. Qamrul Aziz, Advocate For Respondent Nos.1 to 8 :- Mr. N.K. Chatterjee, Advocate SB - Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment On Board 11.08.2025 1. Invoking jurisdiction of this Court under Section173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “Act of 1988”), the appellant-insurance company has preferred this appeal calling in question the legality, validity and correctness of award dated 30.09.2022 (Annexure A/1) passed by learned II Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Janjgir, District Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh, by which the claim application of the claimants has been allowed and compensation to the tune of Rs. 69,15,508/- along with 3 (MAC No. 13 of 2023) 9% interest from the date of claim application has been granted to the claimants for the death of Mohammad Naseeb Qureshi, aged about 55 years, who was working as Senior Agriculture Development Officer and the liability to pay the amount of compensation has been fastened upon the insurance company. 2. Mr. Qamrul Aziz, learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the offending vehicle has been falsely implanted in the accident whereas it was not involved in the accident as the FIR was lodged against an unknown person and, therefore, the insurance company is not liable to pay the amount of compensation. He would further submit that deduction of one fifth is also not proper as the claimants were not dependent on the deceased. 3. Mr. N.K. Chatterjee, learned counsel for the claimants would support the impugned award. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein above and gone through the record with utmost circumspection. 5. Though the insurance company has taken a plea that the offending vehicle which was insured by the appellant- insurance company was not involved in the accident as the FIR was lodged against an unknown person but no 4 (MAC No. 13 of 2023) evidence has been led on behalf of the insurance company to substantiate the aforesaid plea taken in the written statement. Therefore, the said plea of the appellant- insurance company has rightly been turned down by the Claims Tribunal. Further plea of the appellant-insurance company is that the deduction of one fifth is not proper as the claimants were not dependent on the deceased. However, since the total number of dependents of the deceased is eight, the learned Claims Tribunal has proceeded to deduct one fifth towards personal expenses of the deceased, which is in accordance with the principles of law laid down by the Supreme Court in the matter of Sarla Verma & Ors vs Delhi Transport Corp.& Anr1. In that view of the matter, I do not find any good ground to interfere with the impugned award. 6. Accordingly, this appeal deserves to be and is hereby dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own cost(s). 7. Let a certified copy of this order be transmitted to the concerned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal for necessary information and action, if any. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge @d!t! 1 (2009) 6 SCC 121