1 2026:CGHC:4684 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 573 of 2021 * - United India Insurance Company Limited Through Its Authority, In-Charge, T P Hub, Divisional Office- Ist Floor, L I C Building, Magarpara Road, Bilaspur District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Appellant Versus 1 - Fulkunwar Wd/o Late Sarju Ram Bargah Aged About 44 Years R/o Village Amarpur, Pendra, District Bilaspur (Present District Gourela-Pendra-Marwahi) Chhattisgarh 2 - Biganram S/o Late Sarju Ram Bargah Aged About 29 Years R/o Village Amarpur, Pendra, District Bilaspur (Present District Gourela-Pendra-Marwahi) Chhattisgarh 3 - Sigan Ram S/o Late Sarju Ram Bargah Aged About 27 Years R/o Village Amarpur, Pendra, District Bilaspur (Present District Gourela-Pendra-Marwahi) Chhattisgarh 4 - Ramkumar S/o Late Sarju Ram Bargah Aged About 28 Years Aged 17 Years (Now About 28 Years), R/o Village Amarpur, Pendra, District Bilaspur (Present District Gourela-Pendra-Marwahi) Chhattisgarh --- Claimants 5 - Suresh Kumar Sahu S/o Hariram Sahu Aged About 27 Years R/o Village Budhar, P. S. Patna, District Koria Chhattisgarh ........Dirver 6 - Shayam Lal Sahu S/o Bandhanram R/o Village Jatasemar, P. O. Patrapali, P. S. Baikunthpur, District Koriya Chhattisgarh ........(Owner Of Motorcycle) ... Respondents For Appellant/Insurance Company : Mr. Dashrath Gupta, Advocate For Respondents No. 1 to 4/ Claimants : Ms. Bhagwati Kashyap and Ms. Bhavna Chandravanshi, Advocates Digitally signed by RAMESH KUMAR VATTI Date: 2026.01.30 10:59:57 +0530 2 Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment on Board 28/01/2026 1. The appellant/Insurance Company has preferred this appeal assailing the award passed by the learned Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Pendraroad, District Bilaspur (C.G.) in Claim Case No. 19/2011 dated 23.02.2021, whereby the learned Claims Tribunal has granted compensation to the claimants to the tune of Rs.32,61,356/- with interest @ 6% per annum on account of death of Sarju Ram in motor accident. 2. The facts, in brief, are that on 19.08.2009 deceased- Sarju Ram was going to work on his vehicle and when he reached at Shivani-Khadan, Banshipur, the rider of offending motorbike bearing registration No. CG-16 / F-0429 dashed against the vehicle of the deceased from back side, resultantly, he sustained injuries and succumbed to death. An F.I.R. under Sections of 279, 337 and 304 (A) IPC was lodged against the rider of the offending motorbike at Police Station Bhatgaon. 3. Mr. Dashrath Gupta, learned counsel appearing for the appellant/Insurance Company would argue that on 19.08.2009 deceased- Sarju Ram met with an accident as rider of offending motorbike bearing registration No. CG-16 / F-0429 dashed against his vehicle from back side, resultantly, he sustained injuries and succumbed to death. Mr. Gupta would submit that at the time of accident, age of the deceased was 56 years and earning Rs.27,055/- per month as he was an employee of SECL. 3 4. Mr. Dashrath Gupta would further submit that in absence of evidence, the learned Claims Tribunal considered the age of the deceased 50 years and applied multiplier of 13. He would contend that the appellant herein has moved an application under Order 41 Rule 27 of CPC to demonstrate that date of birth of the deceased was 31.01.1953 and on the date of accident, his age was more than 56 years and therefore, the learned Claims Tribunal should have applied multiplier of 9. He would submit that the learned Claims Tribunal further committed error of law by granting award 30% of income for future prospects, whereas, the correct figure would be 15%. He would pray to modify the award accordingly. 5. On the other hand, Ms. Bhagwati Kashyap and Ms. Bhavna Chandravanshi, learned counsels appearing for respondents No. 1 to 4/claimants would oppose. They would submit that the learned Claims Tribunal has granted just and proper compensation. It is argued that the service record of the deceased has been placed at belated stage. They would argue that the Insurance Company should have placed the document before the learned Claims Tribunal. They would further contend that the finding with regard to age of the deceased is finding of fact and as the Insurance Company failed to lead evidence before the learned Claims Tribunal and at appellate stage, application under Order 41 Rule 27 of CPC cannot be allowed. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the learned Claims Tribunal with utmost inspection. 7. Admittedly, the deceased was a SECL employee. The claimants could not adduce documentary evidence to prove his date of birth. The learned Claims Tribunal on the basis of pleadings made in the claim 4 petition and the entry made in the postmortem report, considered the age of the deceased 50 years, applied multiplier accordingly. In this appeal, the appellant/Insurance Company has moved an application under Order 41 Rule 27 of CPC. The service record of the deceased would reveal that his date of birth was 31.01.1953 and thus, on the date of accident, the deceased was aged about 56 years. The documents placed on record by the Insurance Company touch the root of the case and those documents have been obtained from the department i.e. SECL, therefore, I am inclined to allow the application (I.A. No. 01/2021) moved under Order 41 Rule 27 of CPC, accordingly same is allowed. 8. As the date of birth of the deceased was 31.01.1953 and his age at the time of accident was 56 years, the learned Claims Tribunal should have applied multiplier of 9. The claimants would entitled for additional sum of 15% income for future prospects instead of 30%. Thus, the compensation requires reconsideration and same is being revisited herein in below:- Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1. Annual income of the deceased after deducting Income Tax Rs.2,48,627/- Rs.2,48,627/- 2. Future prospects @ 30% Rs.74,588/- + Rs.2,48,627/-= Rs.3,23,215/- Future prospects @ 15% Rs.37,294/- + Rs.2,48,627/-= Rs.2,85,921/- 3. Deduction of 1/4th towards personal expenses Rs.3,23,215/- -- Rs.80,803/-= Rs.2,42,412/- Rs.2,85,921/- -- Rs.71,480/-= Rs.2,14,441/- 4. Multiplier of 13 Rs.2,42,412/- x 13= Rs.31,51,356/- Multiplier of 9 Rs.2,14,441/- x 9= Rs.19,29,969/- 5. Loss of estate Rs.30,000/- Rs.30,000/- 5 and funeral expenses 6. Loss of spousal and parental consortium Rs.80,000/- Rs.80,000/- Total : Rs.32,61,356/- Rs.20,39,969/- Thus, the amount of compensation of Rs.32,61,356/- awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal to the claimants is reduced to Rs.20,39,969/-. 9. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal is allowed in part. The amount of compensation of Rs.32,61,356/- awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal is reduced to Rs.20,39,969/-. The amount of compensation of Rs.20,39,969/- shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of application till its realization as awarded by the Tribunal. The award is modified to the above extent. Rest of the conditions of the award shall remain intact. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge vatti