1 2026:CGHC:14556 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 568 of 2019 1 - Suresh Dewangan S/o Shri Ghanaram Dewangaon Aged About 36 Years R/o Village - Deori, Police Station Komakhan, Tahsil And Civil District And District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. (Claimant), District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus 1 - Smt. Basan Bai W/o Shri Dhaneshwar Yadav Aged About 43 Years R/o Village - Bharuwamunda, Police Station Chura, Tahsil And Civil District And District Gariyaband Chhattisgarh. (Owner Of Motorcycle No. C.G. - 04/ky/5931), District : Gariyabandh, Chhattisgarh 2 - Bajaj Allianz General Ins. Com. Ltd. The Branch Manager, Office At Shiv Mohan Bhawan, Vidhan Sabha Bhawan Road, Pandri, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. (Ins. Com. Of Motorcycle No. C.G. -04/ky/5931), District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Ramesh Kumar Dewanganon S/o Shri Ghanaram Dewangaon Aged About 44 Years R/o Krishna Nagar, D.D. HARNEET KAUR Digitally signed by HARNEET KAUR Date: 2026.03.28 11:51:44 +0530 2 Nagar, Raipur, Police Station D.D. Nagar, Tahsil And Civil District And District Raipur Chhattisgarh. (Owner Of Motorcycle No. C.G. - 04/kx/9232), District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 - I.C.I.C.I. Lombord General Ins. Com. Ltd. The Branch Manager, Office At Vanijaya Bhawan, Devendra Nagar, Square, Jai Road, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. (Ins. Com. Of Motorcycle No. C.G. - 04/kx/9232), District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Appellant : Mr. J.A. Lohani, Advocate For Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Ghanshyam Patel, Advocate SB - Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment on Board 27.03.2026 1. Appellant/claimant has preferred this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 calling in question the legality, validity and correctness of impugned award dated 22/11/2018 passed by learned 1st Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mahasamund in Claim Case No. H-28/2015 seeking enhancement of compensation as well as challenging the finding of contributory negligence recorded by the Claims Tribunal against him. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant/claimant would submit that the Claims Tribunal is absolutely unjustified 3 in holding that there was contributory negligence on the part of the appellant and thereby, deducting 50% from the total compensation amount of Rs. 41,571/- and granting Rs. 20,785.50/- in favour of the appellant/claimant as though the plea of contributory negligence has been taken by the Insurance Company but no evidence has been led by them in this regard. He would further submit that the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is on the lower side and deserves to enhanced. 3. Mr. Ghanshyam Patel, learned counsel for respondent No. 2 would support the impugned award and submit that the fact of contributory negligence has duly been proved by the Insurance Company and as such, the Claims Tribunal has rightly deducted 50% of the award amount towards contributory negligence and moreover, the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is just and proper and does not require interference by this Court. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection. 5. So far as the plea of contributory negligence is concerned, the Insurance Company/respondent No. 2 4 has taken a plea in that regard in their written statement, however, they have not led any evidence in this regard except for the statement of Law Officer of the Insurance Company namely Subodh Kumar Singh (N.A.W-2) who has only stated that the driver did not have valid and effective license on the date of the accident, therefore, the plea of contributory negligence taken by the Insurance Company is not proved and as such, the Claims Tribunal has erred in holding that there was contributory negligence on the part of the appellant/claimant and thereby, deducting half of the compensation amount on account of contributory negligence. Thus, the appellant/claimant is held entitled to total compensation amount i.e. Rs. 41,571/- along with interest @ 7 % per annum from the date of filing of the claim application till the date of its realization. So far as the prayer for enhancement is concerned, the Claims Tribunal has awarded Rs. 31,751/- under medical expenses, as Rs. 3,000/- under loss of income, Rs. 5,000/- under pain and agony, Rs. 2,000/- under nutritional food and assistant’s fee, which in my considered opinion, is just and proper and does not require any interference. 5 6. Accordingly, the instant appeal is allowed to the extent indicated herein-above. No cost(s). Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Harneet