1 2026:CGHC:19823 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1424 of 2019 Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited, Third Floor, Gurukripa Tower, Beside ICICI Bank, Vyapar Vihar Road, Tahsil And District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh...........................Insurer Of Bolero No.CG 13 C 9485. --- Appellant versus 1 - Sandeep Toppo, S/o. Mainu Toppo, Aged About 32 Years, Occupation Raj Miistry, R/o. Village Bhagalpur, Rajapara, Thana And District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Mainu Toppo, S/o. Ogharan Toppo, Aged About 55 Years, R/o. Village Sisringa, Post Pandaripani, Tahsil Farsabahar, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Smt. Subanti Toppo, W/o. Mainu Toppo, Aged About 53 Years, R/o. Village Sisringa, Post Pandaripani, Tahsil Farsabahar, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh. 4 - Yoges Soren, S/o. Loknath Ram, R/o. Village Gindola Naharpali Tahsil And District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh............................Owner Of Bolero No. CG 13-C 9485. ASHOK SAHU Digitally signed by ASHOK SAHU Date: 2026.04.29 16:54:07 +0530 2 5 - Jogender Nayak, S/o. Kundu Nayak, Aged About 32 Years, Occupation Driver, R/o. Village Tukupani Jamchowa, Tahsil Kunkuri, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh.....................Driver Of Bolero No. CG 13 C 9485. --- Respondents For Appellant : Mr. Sangeet Kumar Kushwaha, Advocate For Respondents No1 to 3 : Mr. Shrikant Kaushik, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Rishikant Mahobia, Advocate & MAC No. 1644 of 2019 1 - Sandeep Toppo, S/o. Mainu Toppo, Aged About 32 Years, Occupation - Meson, R/o. Village - Bhagalpur, Rajapara, Tahsil Jashpurnagar, Police Station And District – Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Mainu Toppo, S/o. Ohghran Toppo, Aged About 50 Years, R/o. Village - Sisringa, Post - Pandrapani, Tahsil - Farsabahar, District – Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Smt. Subanti Toppo, W/o. Mainu Toppo, Aged About 53 Years, R/o. Village - Sisringa, Post - Pandrapani, Tahsil - Farsabahar, District – Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. ---Appellants Versus 1 - Yogesh Soren, S/o. Loknath Ram, R/o. Gindola, Naharpali, Tahsil And District – Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. (Owner) 2 - Jagendar Nayak, S/o. Kundu Nayak, Aged About 32 Years, Occupation - Driver, R/o. Village - Tukupani Jamchowa, Tahsil - Kunkuri, District – Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. (Driver) 3 3 - Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited, Gurukripa Towar, Near ICICI Bank, Vaypar Vihar, Bilaspur District– Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ( Insurer ) --- Respondents For Appellants : Mr. Shrikant Kaushik, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Rishikant Mahobia, Advocate For Respondent No.3 : Mr. Sangeet Kumar Kushwaha, Advocate (Single Bench) Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment on Board 29.04.2026 1. Against the impugned award dated 30.03.2019 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jashpur in Claim Case No.60/2018, the insurance company has preferred MAC No.1424/2019 seeking exoneration from the liability to pay the amount of compensation whereas the claimants have preferred MAC No.1644/2019 seeking enhancement of the amount under award. Since common question of law and facts are involved in both the appeals, they are clubbed together, heard together and disposed of by this common order. 2. Mr. Sangeet Kumar Kushwaha, learned counsel for the insurance company, would submit that though the plea of fake insurance policy was specifically taken in the written statement at para 3, but right to lead evidence was closed on 25.03.2019 by rejecting the 4 application to lead evidence, as the law officer who had to give evidence was unwell and on leave, therefore, the impugned award is liable to be set aside. 3. Mr. Shrikant Kaushik, learned counsel appearing for the claimants, would support the impugned award and submit that the amount of compensation awarded under the head of income and consortium deserves to be enhanced. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and gone through the records meticulously. 5. The insurance company has taken a plea that the insurance policy was fake, however, a careful perusal of the record would show that the claimants have filed true copy of the insurance policy and it has been marked as Ex.A-6. The claimants Sandeep Toppo and his witness Jaimangal Ekka have been examined but with regard to insurance policy Ex.A-6, no question has been asked on behalf of the insurance company, though they were cross-examined. Furthermore, no document has been filed by the insurance company to demonstrate that the insurance policy Ex.A-6 was fake and no evidence was led and the right to lead evidence was closed on 25.03.2019 holding that sufficient time has been granted to lead evidence, as the case was fixed for non-applicant’s evidence on 5 11.02.2019, 18.03.2019 & 25.03.2019; therefore, the application of insurance company was rejected. As such, since the appellant/ insurance company has allowed the policy to be exhibited as Ex. A-6 and no question was asked from the claimant and his witness and no document has been filed to demonstrate that the policy Ex.A-6 is fake and furthermore, the insurance company did not avail the opportunity to lead evidence though time was granted thrice, as such, I am of the considered opinion that right to lead evidence of the insurance company has rightly been closed by the Claims Tribunal. As such, I do not find any merit in the appeal filed by the insurance company and accordingly, the same deserves to be and hereby dismissed. However, the penal interest awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal is set aside. Consequently, the claimants are entitled for interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of claim application. 6. So far as the appeal of the claimants is concerned, this Court is recomputing the compensation as below:- Heads Compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court Income as per minimum wages Rs. 6000 x 12 = Rs. 72,000/- per annum Rs. 7,800 x 12 = Rs. 93,600/- per annum Add future prospects @40% Rs. 72,000 + 28,800 = Rs. 1,00,800/- Rs. 93,600 + 37,440 = Rs. 1,31,040/- 6 Deduction of 1/2 towards personal expenses Rs. 50,400/- Rs. 65,520/- Multiplier of 18 Rs. 50,400 x 18 = Rs. 9,07,200/- Rs. 65,520 x 18 = Rs. 11,79,360/- Consortium Nil Rs. 44,000 x 2 = Rs. 88,000/- Loss of Estate Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 15,000/- Funeral Expenses Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 15,000/- Total Rs. 9,37,200/- Rs. 12,97,360/- 7. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs. 9,37,200/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 12,97,360/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs. 9,37,200/-, the claimants are entitled for an additional amount of Rs. 3,60,160/-. The concerned respondent is directed to deposit the amount of compensation as enhanced by this Court within a period of 45 days. The additional amount of compensation shall also carry interest @ 6% 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 insurance company and the appeal of claimants are partly allowed. The impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Ashok Judge