Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 51895 (CHH)

THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED v. RAMKALA BAI

MAC/599/2023 · 2025-10-14

Shri Sanjay K Agrawal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:51298 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 599 of 2023 The New India Assurance Company Limited, (Wrongly Mentioned Insurance), By Divisional Manager, Second Floor Lig Building, Life Insurance Road Pandri Raipu, Tehsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh. Through Authorized Signatory Manager T. P Claim Hub Bilaspur (C.G.) The New India Assurance Company Limited, Bilaspur Divisional Office Bilapsur Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant versus 1 - Ramkala Bai W/o Late Rambabu Dangi Aged About 34 Years R/o Village Minagaon, Post Barkheda, P.S. Chhapiheda, District Rajgarh (M.P.) 2 - Minor Ritubai Alias Ritu Dangi D/o Late Rambabu Dangi Aged About 12 Years Minors Through Their Guardian Mother Ramkala Bai R/o Village And Post Biaora Kalan, P.S. Khilchipur, District Rajgarh (M.P.) 3 - Minor Manisha Dangi D/o Late Rambabu Dangi Aged About 8 Years Minors Through Their Guardian Mother Ramkala Bai R/o Parthivi Nagar, Hirapur, P.S. Amanaka, Tehsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh. HARNEET KAUR Digitally signed by HARNEET KAUR Date: 2025.10.15 15:41:21 +0530 2 4 - Minor Bhanupratap Singh Dangi Alias Bhanupratap S/o Late Rambabu Dangi Aged About 6 Years Nill 5 - Dhapu Bai Dangi W/o Narsingh Lal Dangi Alias Narsangh Lal Aged About 60 Years Nill 6 - Narsang Lal Alias Narsingh Lal S/o Late Harpal Dangi Aged About 64 Years Nill 7 - Prakash Singh Rajput, S/o Late Roopsingh Rajput, R/o Marlinhouse Pandritarai Near Mandi Gate, P.S. Mova Pandri, Tehsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh. (Driver Of Offending Vehicle Bus No. C.G. -04-E-2190) 8 - Smt. Manju Badariya W/o Shrikant Kasar (Badariya) R/o Kasar Gali Satti Bazar Raipur, Tehsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh. (Owner Of Offending Vehicle Bus No. C.G. -04-E- 2190 ... Respondent(s) For Appellant : Mr. Abhishek Mishra, Advocate For Respondents : None SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment On Board 15.10.2025 1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “Act of 1988”) has been preferred by the appellant/Insurance Company challenging the impugned award dated 07/12/2022 passed by learned 12th Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) in 3 Claim Case No. 450/2020, whereby learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs. 42,22,000/- as compensation to respondents No. 1 to 6/claimants for the death of Rambabu Dangi, aged about 40 years, working as a Supervisor/Surveyer in GEO Tracks International Services, Raipur and the liability of payment of compensation has been fastened upon the appellant/Insurance Company. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant/claimant would submit that the trial Court has erred in granting excess compensation as the monthly income of the appellant has been assessed as Rs. 21,000/- whereas house rent allowance of Rs. 3,000/- and food allowance of Rs. 6,000/- ought to have been deducted from his monthly income, as such, the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal ought to be reduced. 3. None appeared on behalf of the respondents though served. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant, considered his submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection. 5. In this regard, the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in the matter of Raghuvir Singh Matolya and Others v. 4 Hari Singh Malviya and Others1 may be noticed herein profitably whereby their Lordships have clearly held that HRA and DA should be included for determining income of the deceased and accordingly, the amount of compensation has to be computed. 6. In light of the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in Raghuvir Singh (supra), I am of the considered opinion that the Claims Tribunal is absolutely justified in including the amount of House Rent Allowance and Food Allowance in the monthly income of the deceased. As such, I do not find any merit in this appeal. 7. Accordingly, this appeal, being devoid of merits, is liable to be and is hereby dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own cost(s). Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Harneet 1 (2009) 15 SCC 363