Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 60260 (CHH)

SMT. MUNGIYA BAI SAHU v. IBRAR KHAN

MAC/1472/2022 · 2025-12-04

Shri Sanjay K Agrawal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 MAC No. 1472 of 2022 2025:CGHC:59257 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1472 of 2022 1.Smt. Mungiya Bai Sahu W/o Late Shivchand Sahu, Aged About 55 Years; 2.Devendra Kumar Sahu, S/o Late Shivchand Sahu, Aged About 32 Years; 3.Yogeshwari Sahu, D/o Late Shivchand Sahu, Aged About 30 Years; 4.Pritam Sahu, S/o Late Shivchand Sahu, Aged About 29 Years; All are R/o Village Biroda, Police Station Abhanpur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 5.Smt. Savitri Sahu W/o Durgesh Sahu, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Vishwakarma Chowk, Shivnagar, Handipara, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh. (Applicants/claimants). ... Appellants versus 1.Ibrar Khan S/o Jabbar Khan, Aged About 28 Years R/o Village Inghota, Tahsil Modaha, District Hamidpur (U.P) (Non-Applicant No. 1) Present R/o Nizami Enterprises, Ward No. 14, Metal Park Road, Rawanbhata, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. (Driver Of Vehicle Hiwa Truk Bearing Registration No. CG/04/LJ/0261). 2.Nizami Enterprises, Propritor Mohammad Hanif, S/o Abrar Khan, Nizami Enterprises, Ward No. 14, Metal Park Road, Rawanbhata, District Raipur ANKIT KUMAR SINGH Digitally signed by ANKIT KUMAR SINGH Date: 2025.12.05 17:58:09 +0530 2 MAC No. 1472 of 2022 Chhattisgarh. (Non-Applicant No. 2) Registered Owner Of Vehicle Hiwa Truck Bearing Registration No. CG/04/LJ/0261). 3.The Branch Manager, National Insurance Company Limited, Through Branch Manager, Branch No. 01 A, Naveen Bazar, Fool, Chowk, G.E. Road, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh (Non-Applicant No. 3) (Insurer Of Vehicle Vehicle Hiwa Truck Bearing Registration No. CG/04/LJ/0261). ... Respondents For Appellants :- Mr. Bhupendra Kumar Dewangan, Advocate. For Respondent No.3 :- Mr. Dashrath Gupta, Advocate. SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment On Board 05.12.2025 1.This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “Act of 1988”) has been preferred by the appellants/claimants seeking enhancement in the amount of compensation, challenging the impugned award dated 04.08.2022 passed by the 12th Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh (for short “Claims Tribunal”) in Claim Case No. 511/2019 whereby learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a sum of 3 MAC No. 1472 of 2022 ₹80,56,072/- as compensation along with interest for death of Shiv Chand Sahu. 2.Mr. Bhupendra Kumar Dewangan, learned counsel for the appellants, would submit that learned Claims Tribunal has erred in awarding less amount of compensation in the facts of the case. He would also submit that the compensation amount awarded by the Claims Tribunal is not just and proper and the same is liable to be enhanced. 3.Mr. Dasrath Gupta, learned counsel for the Insurance Company/respondent No.3, would oppose the prayer made by learned counsel for the appellant and submit that the amount of compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is just and proper which does not call for any interference. 4.I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein- above and gone through the records meticulously. 4 MAC No. 1472 of 2022 5.The Claims Tribunal has awarded compensation to the tune of ₹80,56,072/- for death of Shiv Chand Sahu, aged about 59 years at the time of incident, who was working as Assistant Line Men Grade-I in the C.S.P.D.C.L. For future prospect 15% has been awarded by the Claims Tribunal and multiplier of 9 has been used by the Claim Tribunal while granting the award. Furthermore, under the heads of Spousal consortium ₹44,000/-, Parental consortium 1,76,000/-, loss of estate 16,500/- and ₹ ₹ funeral expenses 16,500/- have been awarded by ₹ the Claims Tribunal which is in accordance with law. As such, the Claims Tribunal has rightly awarded the compensation amount 80,56,072/- to ₹ the claimants which is just and proper and does not call for any interference. 6.Accordingly, the instant appeal is dismissed finding no merit. No order as to cost(s). Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Ankit