1 2026:CGHC:14158 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 2313 of 2024 • Fakirchand Sahu S/o Shivkumar Sahu, Aged About 32 Years R/o Village- Pendri, Post Kalangpur, Tahsil-Gunderdehi, District-Balod (C.G.) (Claimant). ... Appellant versus 1. Gurendra Kumar Sahu S/o Lukumar Sahu, Aged About 29 Years R/o Village- Pikaripar, Post Armarikala, Tahsil Gurur, District-Balod (C.G.) (Driver Of Offending Vehicle Cg-08/l-2476). 2. Janakal S/o Chandulal Sahu, Aged About 38 Years R/o Village-Funda, Post- Achoud, Tahsil-Gunderdehi, District-Balod (C.G.) (Owner Of Offending Vehicle Cg-08/l-2476). 3. Magma H.D.I. General Insurance Company Limited, Through-Branch Manager/branch Office, Office No. 501, 509-512, Fifth Floor, D.B. City, Corporate Plot No.1, Block No.9, Rajbandah Maidan Raipur, Tahsil And District-Raipur (C.G.) ------(Insurer Of Offending Vehicle Cg-08/l-2476) ... Respondents (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Appellant : Mr. Anil Kumar Gulati, Advocate. For Respondent No.2 : Ms. Mamta Jaiswal, Advocate. For Respondent No.3 : Ms. Aditi Diwan, Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput Order on Board 24/03/2026 1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant/claimant under Section 173 DEEPTI JHA Digitally signed by DEEPTI JHA 2 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short ‘M.V.Act’) being aggrieved by the impugned award dated 05.09.2024 (Annexure-A/1) passed by the Upper Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (F.T.C.), District Dhamtari (C.G.) in Claim Case No.87/2022. 2. By the impugned award, learned Tribunal has awarded Rs.1,24,000/- in favour of the appellant/claimant as compensation on account of injury sustained by the appellant/claimant (Fakirchand Sahu) in an accident, which took place on 31.03.2022 by rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle bearing registration No.CG-08-L-2476 driven by respondent No.1/driver, which was owned by respondent No.2/owner and insured with respondent No.3/insurance company. 3. The appellant/claimant filed an application under Section 166 of the MV Act, claiming compensation of Rs.17,00,000/-. As per pleadings, the injured was aged about 32 years, he was working as labour earning Rs.12,000/- per month. 4. Respondent No.1/driver & respondent No.2/owner of the offending vehicle, jointly filed their reply and stating inter alia that vehicle was being plied cautiously by the respondent No.1/driver, suddenly animals came in front of the vehicle, on account of collision, appellant and other persons received injuries. It is further stated that since vehicle was insured with the insurance company, therefore, the liability ought to have been fastened upon the insurance company. 5. Respondent No.3/insurance company filed written statement, denied the averments and pleaded that there is violation of terms and conditions of the insurance policy, therefore, it may be exonerated from the liability. 6. On the basis of aforesaid pleadings, learned Claims Tribunal framed as many as 8 issues, decided the same in favour of the appellant/claimant and 3 awarded total compensation of Rs.1,24,000/-. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant/claimant submits that just and proper compensation has not been awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal. He further submits that appellant suffered fracture on his person, therefore, he seeks enhancement in the amount of compensation. 8. Learned counsel for the respondent No.3/insurance company opposes the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant and submits that the compensation as awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal is just and proper, hence does not call for any interference by this Court. 9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of claim case available on record. 10. The learned Claims Tribunal has awarded compensation in favour of the appellant/claimant in the following manner :- S. No. Particulars Compensation 1. Loss of income Rs.54,000/- 2. Medical Expenses Rs.20,000/- 3. Transportation Expenses, Attendant, Nutritional Diet and Pain & Suffering Rs.50,000/- Total Rs.1,24,000/- 11. Taking into consideration, the evidence available on record, this Court is of the opinion that further Rs.26,000/- apart from the total amount of compensation as awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal would be just and proper, which can be awarded in favour of the appellant/claimant. Accordingly, the appellant/claimant is awarded enhanced amount of Rs.26,000/-, thus, the appellant is entitled to get total compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- (Rs.1,24,000 + Rs.26,000), which shall be payable by the insurance company within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of 4 copy of this order. The amount, if any, awarded in favour of the appellant/claimant shall be adjusted from the remaining amount. 12. In view of the above, the instant appeal is partly allowed as indicated hereinabove. 13. The pending interlocutory application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge Deepti Jha