1 2025:CGHC:61019 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 292 of 2018 1 - Bhugna Mahanand S/o Pandu Mahanand Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Khujjan Bahal, Post Kantabhanji, District Balangir, Odisha, Presently Resident Of Krishna Nagar, Supela, Bhilai, Tehsil And District Durg, Chhattisgarh, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 2 - Fagnu Mahanand S/o Pandu Mahanand Aged About 38 Years R/o Village Khujjan Bahal, Post Kantabhanji, District Balangir, Odisha, Presently Resident Of Krishna Nagar, Supela, Bhilai, Tehsil And District Durg, Chhattisgarh, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 3 - Tari Mahanand S/o Pandu Mahanand Aged About 36 Years R/o Village Khujjan Bahal, Post Kantabhanji, District Balangir, Odisha, Presently Resident Of Krishna Nagar, Supela, Bhilai, Tehsil And District Durg, Chhattisgarh, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Ashwani Kharsal S/o Jagbandhu Kharsal Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Gambhariguda, Post Sinhapali, District Nayapada, Odisha (Driver Of Vehicle Gvw Max Pickup No. Or-26-2303), District : Nuapada *, Orissa 2 - Chatur Bagh S/o Abhiram Bagh R/o Pokerpod, Post Khariyad, District Nayapada, Odisha (Registered Owner Of Vehicle Gvw Max Pickup No. Or-26-2303), District : Nuapada *, Orissa ABHIGYA SAXENA Digitally signed by ABHIGYA SAXENA 2 3 - (A) Branch Manager Bajaj Aliyanj General Insurance Company Ltd. Shivmohan Bhawan/complex, 2nd Floor, Vidhansabha Road, Pandari, Raipur, Tahsil And District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3.1 - (B) Branch Manager Bajaj Aliyanj General Insurance Company Ltd. Giriraj Complex, Satanand Chambers, 1st Floor Shop No.212-213, Station Road, Durg, Tehsil And District Durg, Chhattisgarh (Insurer Of Vehicle Gvw Max Pickup No. Or-26-2303), District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Amit Tamrakar, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Avinash Chand Sahu, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ghanshyam Patel, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board (15.12.2025) 1. This appeal has been filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 by the appellant/claimant for enhancement against the award dated 25.10.2017 passed by the learned 4th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Durg, District Durg (C.G.), in Claim Case No. 378/2010 whereby compensation of Rs. 55,000/- with interest @ 6% per annum, in favour of the appellant/claimant has been awarded. 2. Facts of the case :- That the appellants seeking compensation to the tune of ₹17,85,000/- from the respondents under various heads on account of the untimely death of Ghane Mahanand @ Kali, contending inter alia that on 25.03.2009 the deceased was travelling from 3 Bhalumuda to Khariyad in a vehicle bearing registration No. OR- 26/2303 along with other occupants, and when the said vehicle reached near village Junain, it overturned due to being driven by respondent No.1 in a rash and negligent manner, as a result whereof the deceased sustained grievous injuries on her head, mouth, ear and other parts of the body and, despite being taken for treatment, succumbed to the said injuries at the Government Hospital; it was further pleaded that at the time of her death the deceased was working as a labourer and was earning approximately ₹5,000/- per month, and that the appellants, being her legal representatives, suffered irreparable loss of dependency, love and affection on account of her demise; however, the learned Claims Tribunal, after hearing the parties and appreciating the evidence on record, awarded a meagre sum of ₹25,000/- towards funeral expenses and ₹10,000/- towards loss of love and affection, thereby granting a total compensation of only ₹55,000/- for the death of Ghane Mahanand @ Kali, which award is wholly inadequate, unjust and contrary to settled principles of law, and hence the present appeal has been preferred seeking enhancement of compensation. 3. When the claim application for compensation was filed by the present appellants/claimants of deceased before the Claims Tribunal against the driver, owner and insurance company of the alleged vehicle, the Tribunal has awarded compensation in conventional heads to the tune of Rs.25,000/- towards funeral expense and Rs.10,000/- each towards loss of consortium, has been calculated and awarded total compensation of Rs.55,000/- with interest @ 6% per annum, in favour 4 of the appellants/claimants. Hence, this appeal for enhancement. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side and needs to be enhanced suitably. The learned Claims Tribunal has committed a grave legal error in disbelieving the testimony of the claimants’ witnesses, who were duly examined in support of their pleadings. The rejection of their statements amounts to a failure in appreciating the evidence on record. The learned Claims Tribunal erred in passing the award. In light of the precedents set by this Hon’ble Court in National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi and Others 1 . It ought to have considered that the deceased left behind children making a total of three dependents. The findings recorded by the learned Claims Tribunal are perverse and contrary to law, and therefore liable to be set aside. The Tribunal’s conclusions run contrary to the documentary evidence and oral testimony on record, reflecting a failure to properly consider the facts in their correct perspective. The learned Claims Tribunal also erred in awarding interest at the rate of 9% per annum, warranting suitable enhancement of the interest awarded. In light of the above, the appellants respectfully pray that the impugned award be set aside and the claim be enhanced as per the submissions made herein. 5. No representation was made on behalf of Driver and Owner. 6. On the other hand, it has argued on behalf of the counsel for respondent Insurance Company that in the facts and circumstances of 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 5 the case at hand, the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal requires no interference of this Court and no further enhancement is required to be made, therefore, the appeal filed by the claimants is liable to be dismissed. 7. I Heard counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record with utmost circumspection. 8. In a motor accident claim case, what is important is that, the compensation to be awarded by the Courts/Tribunals should be just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the case. It should neither be a meager amount of compensation, nor a Bonanza. 9. Now this Court shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.55,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the given facts and circumstances of the case. 10. As regards the claimants are the children of the deceased so in view of judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma (Smt.) and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another , 2 and Pranay Sethi (supra), the claimants are entitled for loss of estate Rs. 18,000/- (10% increase in every three years), for funeral expenses Rs. 18,000/- (10% increase in every three years) and as per Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nanu, 3 the claimants are further entitled for loss of consortium Rs. 48,000/- (10% increase in every three years) each i.e. Rs.1,44,000/-. Therefore, the claimants would become 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 3 AIR Online 2018 SC 189 6 entitled for total compensation of Rs.1,80,000/-. In light of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court this Court enhances the compensation in the following manner:- Sn. Heads Calculation 01 Towards loss of estate Rs. 18,000/- 02 Funeral Expenses Rs. 18,000/- 03 Towards loss of consortium to all the six claimants @ Rs.48,000/- x 3 Rs. 1,44,000/- Total Rs.1,80,000/- 11. Accordingly, the total compensation is enhanced to Rs.1,80,000/- from Rs.55,000/-. Thus, there is an enhancement of Rs.1,25,000/-, which shall carry interest at the same rate as awarded by the Tribunal (6% p.a.) from the date of claim petition till realization. Though, in the present case, the insurance company stands exonerated on account of the offending vehicle having been plied in contravention of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy, however, having due regard to the benevolent nature of the legislation and in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, and further considering the fact that the owner and driver of the offending vehicle have neither appeared before this Court nor challenged the liability fastened upon them, this Court is of the considered opinion that the insurance company shall satisfy the award in the first instance, with liberty to recover the same from the owner and driver of the offending vehicle. It is further directed that if any amount has already been deposited by the owner, the insurance 7 company shall be liable to deposit only the remaining balance amount. 12. As a result, the appeal is allowed in part. The award dated 25.10.2017 is modified to the extent indicated above. Rest of the terms and conditions of the Tribunal’s award remain intact. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) JUDGE Saxena