1 2025:CGHC:61030 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 942 of 2018 1 - Tunnu Ram S/o Mundra Muriya Aged About 45 Years R/o Near S.B.I. Bank, P.S. And District Dantewada, Chhattisgarh 2 - Ganesh Ram Nag S/o Late Ghasiram Nag Aged About 30 Years R/o Balpet, Patelpara, Tahsil, P.S. And District Dantewada, Chhattisgarh --- Appellants Versus 1 - Smt. Balmati W/o Late Ramesh Kumar Bhoyar Aged About 40 Years R/o Gumda (Nakapara) Tahsil, P.S. Geedam, District Dantewada, Chhattisgarh 2 - Ajay Kumar Bhoyar S/o Late Ramesh Kumar Bhoyar Aged About 11 Years Minor Through His Natural Guardian Res. No. 01, R/o Gumda (Nakapara) Tahsil, P.S. Geedam, District Dantewada, Chhattisgarh --- Respondents MAC No. 947 of 2018 1 - Tunnu Ram S/o Mundra Muriya Aged About 45 Years R/o Near S.B.I. Bank, P.S. And District Dantewada, Chhattisgarh 2 - Ganesh Ram Nag S/o Ghasiram Nag Aged About 30 Years R/o Balpet, Patelpara, Tahsil, P.S. And District Dantewada, Chhattisgarh --- Appellants Versus 1 - Sonu Kumar Thakre S/o Madhu Kumar Thakre Bhoyar Aged About 18 Years R/o Kotwar Para, Geedam, Tahsil And P.S. Geedam District Dantewada, Chhattisgarh YOGESH TIWARI Digitally signed by YOGESH TIWARI Date: 2025.12.16 12:36:23 +0530 2 2 - Madhu S/o Meta Aged About 47 Years Geedam, Tahsil And P.S. Geedam District Dantewada, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Appellants : Mr. Vikas A. Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondents : None Hon’ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge Judgment on Board 15.12.2025 1. Since both the appeals arise out of same accident as such, they have been clubbed together, heard together and being disposed of by this common judgment. 2. Challenge in these appeals is to the award dated 16.03.2017 passed by the learned Second Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, South Bastar Dantewada (C.G.) (hereinafter referred to as 'Claims Tribunal') in Claim Case No.52/2015 and 53/2015, respectively whereby learned Claims Tribunal allowed claim applications in part of the claimants and fastened the liability to pay the amount of compensation upon the driver and owner of the offending vehicle. 3. Brief facts of these appeals, in a nutshell, are that on 12.09.2014, late Ramesh Kumar Bhoyar along with Ramesh Kumar Thakre was returning to their native village Geedam after shopping from Barsur market on motorcycle bearing registration No. CG-18-E- 6750. When they reached the incident spot near Kosa Centre on 3 Geedam–Barsur main road, the driver of motorcycle bearing registration No. CG-18-J-1890 (for short, ‘offending vehicle’), i.e. non-applicant No. 01, while driving in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against their motorcycle, causing a serious accident. 4. The claimants have filed the claim petitions before the learned Claims Tribunal seeking compensation to the tune of Rs.54,50,000/- and 30,90,000/- respectively. 5. On appreciation of pleadings, oral and documentary evidence brought on record by the respective parties, Claims Tribunal while relying upon the various case laws, awarded a total compensation of Rs.44,21,625.6 in Claim Case No.52/2015 and Rs.5,90,240/- in Claim Case No.53/2015 along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim applications till its realization and fastened the liability to pay the amount of compensation upon the driver and owner of the offending vehicle. 6. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the impugned award passed by the learned Claims Tribunal is contrary to the facts and evidence available on record and, therefore, deserves to be set aside or suitably modified. It is contended that the learned Claims Tribunal has erred in holding the driver of the offending vehicle solely negligent, whereas the evidence on record clearly establishes contributory negligence on the part of the deceased/driver of motorcycle bearing registration No. CG- 4 18-E-6750. The findings recorded with regard to rash and negligent driving are based on conjectures and surmises, without proper appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence. It is further submitted that the quantum of compensation awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal is excessive and disproportionate to the actual loss suffered by the claimants. It is contended that fastening the entire liability upon the driver and owner of the offending vehicle is illegal and unsustainable in the eyes of law, and prays that the impugned award be set aside or, in the alternative, the compensation amount be suitably reduced in the interest of justice. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the appellants and perused the record of the claim cases carefully. 8. The learned Claims Tribunal, while passing the impugned award, has held that the accident in question occurred on 12.09.2014 due to rash and negligent driving of motorcycle bearing registration No.CG-18-J-1890 by non-applicant No. 01. The Tribunal, on due appreciation of the oral evidence of AW-1 (wife of the deceased) and AW-2 (eye-witness Rajkumar Sori), found their testimonies to be cogent, consistent and duly corroborated by the documentary evidence on record. The First Information Report (Exhibit A-01), Inquest Intimation Reports (Exhibits A-07 and A-08), Map Panchayatnama (Exhibit A-05), seizure memos (Exhibits A-02 to A-04), postmortem report (Exhibit A-10) and 5 other contemporaneous documents clearly established that the deceased Ramesh Kumar Bhoyar and Ramesh Kumar Thakre sustained fatal head injuries in the accident caused by the offending vehicle. 9. Having heard learned counsel for the appellants and upon re- appreciation of the entire evidence available on record, this Court finds that the findings recorded by the learned Claims Tribunal on the issue of negligence, dependency and quantum of compensation are based on proper appreciation of oral and documentary evidence and do not suffer from any perversity or illegality. The compensation awarded is just, reasonable and in accordance with the settled principles governing assessment of compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act. No ground is made out for interference with the well-reasoned impugned award. 10. Accordingly, both the appeals (MAC No.942/2018 and MAC No.947/2018) being devoid of merit are hereby dismissed. The impugned award dated 16.03.2017 passed by the learned Claims Tribunal is affirmed. 11. The record of the concerned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal is directed to be sent forthwith for necessary action and compliance. Sd/--/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Yogesh