1 (MAC No. 98 of 2022 & MAC No. 244 of 2022) 2025:CGHC:49034 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 98 of 2022 1 - Sohaglal S/o Brijlal Aged About 18 Years R/o Village Sarbhauka, Tahsil Podi Uproda, District Korba Chhattisgarh. --- Appellant(s) versus 1 - Ramlal Binjhwar S/o Ram Singh Binjhwar Aged About 26 Years R/o Village Sarbhauka, Police Station Bango, Tahsil Podi Uproda, District Korba Chhattisgarh. 2 - Ram Singh S/o Jagatram Caste Binjhwar, R/o Village Sarbhauka, Police Station Bango, Post Office Gursiya, Tahsil Podi Uproda, District Korba Chhattisgarh. 3 - Branch Manager S.B.I. General Insurance , 2nd Floor, Ramaport Main Road, Near Mahima Billa Bazar Bilaspur, Vyapar Vihar Road, Bilaspur , District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. (Insurance Company) --- Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from the Case Information System) For Appellant :- Ms. Swati Verma, Advocate For Respondent No.3 :- Mr. Utsav Mahiswar, Advocate MAC No. 244 of 2022 1 - SBI General Insurance Company Limited Through Branch Manager, 2nd Floor, Rama Port Main Road, Mahima Bila Bazaar, Vyapar Vihar Road, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ---Appellant(s) ADITI DIWAN KAIWART Digitally signed by ADITI DIWAN KAIWART Date: 2025.09.25 17:42:07 +0530 2 (MAC No. 98 of 2022 & MAC No. 244 of 2022) Versus 1 - Sohaglal S/o Brijlal, Aged About 18 Years R/o Village Sarbhowka, Tehsil Podi Uproda, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh 2 - Ramlal Binjhwar S/o Ram Singh Binjhwar, Aged About 26 Years R/o Village Sarbhowka, P.S. Bango, Tehsil Podi Uproda, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh 3 - Ram Singh, S/o Jagatram, Caste Binjhwar, R/o Village Sarbhowka, P.S. Bango, P.O. Gursiya, Tehsil Podi Uproda, District Korba Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from the Case Information System) For Appellant :- Mr. Utsav Mahiswar, Advocate For Respondents :- None. SB - Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment on Board 24.09.2025 1. Since common question of facts and law are involved and these two appeals have arisen from a common award passed by learned Claims Tribunal in Claim Case No.141/2014, these two appeals are clubbed together, heard together and are decided by this common order. 2. These two appeals have been preferred challenging impugned award dated 20.10.2021 (Annexure A/1), passed by learned II Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Katghora, District Korba, Chhattisgarh, by which the Claims Tribunal has awarded compensation to the tune of 3 (MAC No. 98 of 2022 & MAC No. 244 of 2022) Rs.12,000/- along with 7% per annum interest to appellant/claimant - Sohaglal for the injuries suffered by him in a motor accident and the liability to pay the amount of compensation has been fastened upon the insurance company. 3. Mr. Utsav Mahiswar, learned counsel for the insurance company would submit that the claimant – Sohaglal was traveling as a gratuitous passenger in the offending vehicle (trolley truck), which is in violation of terms and conditions of the insurance policy and therefore, the insurance company be completely exonerated from the liability to pay the amount of compensation. 4. Ms. Swati Verma, learned counsel for the appellant/claimant - Sohaglal would submit that the amount of compensation may kindly be enhanced as the compensation awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal is on the lower side. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein above and gone through the records with utmost circumspection. 6. So far as the appeal of the insurance company regarding exoneration from the liability to pay the amount of 4 (MAC No. 98 of 2022 & MAC No. 244 of 2022) compensation is concerned, it is the case of the insurance company that the claimant was traveling as a gratuitous passenger in the offending vehicle. However, the learned Claims Tribunal has clearly recorded a finding that the person who lodged the FIR namely, Lalit Kumar Binjhwar has not been examined and therefore, on the basis of oral evidence and documentary records, learned Claims Tribunal held that the claimant was a pedestrian and was standing at the place of incident. As such, the said finding recorded by the Claims Tribunal is a correct finding of facts based on the materials available on record and the same is neither perverse nor contrary to the record and learned Claims Tribunal has rightly fastened the liability upon the insurance company to pay the amount of compensation. 7. Now, learned Claims Tribunal has awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.12,000/- to appellant/claimant - Sohaglal for the injuries suffered by him and for which he remained hospitalized for 01 day. However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the amount of compensation of Rs.12,000/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.20,000/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs.12,000/-, appellant/claimant 5 (MAC No. 98 of 2022 & MAC No. 244 of 2022) - Sohaglal is entitled for an additional amount of Rs.8,000/-. The concerned respondent is directed to deposit the amount of compensation as enhanced by this Court within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 7% per annum from the date of filing of claim application before the Tribunal till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. 8. Accordingly, the appeal of appellant-insurance company is dismissed, however, the appeal filed by the appellant/ claimant - Sohaglal is allowed to the above extent. The concerned Tribunal shall pass appropriate order with regard to apportionment, investment and disbursement of the enhanced amount of compensation. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) @d!t! Judge