Page No.1 of 4 IN MAC-5-2023 2025:CGHC:57283 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 5 of 2023 [Arising out of award dt. 21.09.2022, passed in Claim Case No.54 of 2020 (Siyaram Bhardwaj and another v. ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company) by the 2nd Addl. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Balodabazar (CG)] 1 - Siyaram Bhardwaj S/o Sonsay Bhardwaj Aged About 50 Years Village Sel Thana And Tahsil Kasdol, District : Balodabazar- Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh 2 - Smt. Santoshi W/o Siya Ram Bhardwaj Aged About 48 Years Village Sel Thana And Tahsil Kasdol, District : Balodabazar- Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh ... Appellants Versus ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Resident Of Ground Floor Vaniyak Bhawan Devendra Nagar Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent [Cause-title taken from Case Information System (CIS)] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Appellants : Mr. Ravi Kumar, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. Suraj Patel, Advocate ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Single Bench: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal (Order on Board) 25.11.2025 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 challenging the impugned award dt. SAIFAN KHAN Digitally signed by SAIFAN KHAN Page No.2 of 4 IN MAC-5-2023 21.09.2022, passed in Claim Case No.54 of 2020 (Siyaram Bhardwaj and another v. ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company) by the 2nd Addl. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Balodabazar (CG), whereby learned Claims Tribunal has dismissed their claim applications by holding that the deceased was son of the owner of the offending vehicle and, as such, their claim under Section 163 would not be maintainable. 2. Learned counsel for the appellants would submit that learned Claims Tribunal has erred in rejecting the claim application of the appellants/claimants by recording findings which are perverse and contrary to the record. He vehemently argued that the insurance policy (Ex.A/9C) would clearly shows that an amount of Rs.750/-, as premium for compulsory personal accident (CPA) covering the risk for owner and driver of the vehicle, has already been paid and, therefore, liability to pay an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation is to be fastened upon the respondent-Insurance Company, which the learned Claims Tribunal has miserably failed to do so. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appellants are entitled to get an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent would support the impugned order by opposing the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant and prays for dismissal of this Page No.3 of 4 IN MAC-5-2023 appeal. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection. 5. In the case at hand, a careful perusal of the insurance policy (Ex.A/9C) would show that an amount of Rs.750/-, as premium for compulsory personal accident (CPA) covering the risk for owner and driver of the vehicle, has been paid and, consequently, liability to pay an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation is upon the respondent- Insurance Company, which the learned Claims Tribunal has failed to do. In this regard, the Supreme Court in the matter of Ramkhiladi and another v. United India Insurance Company and another 1 has clearly held that as per the contract of insurance, in case of personal accident the owner-driver is entitled to a sum of Rs.1 lakh. 6. In that view of the matter, in the considered opinion of this Court, the appellants are held entitled for an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only). The impugned order dt. 21.09.2022, passed by the learned Claims Tribunal is hereby set aside. The aforesaid amount of Rs.1 lakh shall carry interest @ 9% per annum from the date of claim application before the Tribunal (i.e.27.11.2020) till its realization. The concerned respondent is directed to deposit the amount of compensation as enhanced by this 1 (2020) 2 SCC 550 Page No.4 of 4 IN MAC-5-2023 Court within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The concerned Tribunal shall pass appropriate order with regard to apportionment, investment and disbursement of the aforesaid amount of compensation. 7. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed to the extent as indicated herein-above. No cost. sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge s@if