1 CGHC010093692021 2026:CGHC:31047 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 192 of 2021 1 - Dwarika, S/o Shiv Singh Patel Aged About 47 Years R/o Village - Bagledi, Post Keshtara, Police Station Saja, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh 2 - Smt. Laxmi Bai W/o Dwarika Patel Aged About 42 Years R/o Village - Bagledi, Post Keshtara, Police Station Saja, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh 3 - Smt. Pushpa Bai W/o Late Lekhram, Aged About 21 Years R/o Village - Bagledi, Post Keshtara, Police Station Saja, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh ... Appellants versus 1 - Surendra Patel S/o Munna Patel, Aged About 31 Years R/o Village Begledi, Post Keshtara, Police Station Saja, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh. (Driver), District : Bemetara, Chhattisgarh 2 - Branch Manager, The New India Insurance Company Ltd., Zonal Office, Bhilai, 1st Floor, Chouhan State G.E. Road, Supela Bhilai, District Durg Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2026.07.25 14:40:05 +0530 2 For Appellants/Claimants : Mr. Amit Kumar Sahu, Advocate For Respondent No.2 : Mr. Azad Siddiqui, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Judgment on Board (21.07.2026) 1. This appeal has been filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 by the appellants/claimants for enhancement against the award dated 21.01.2021 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bemetara (C.G.), in Claim Case No. 41/2019, whereby compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- under Personal Accident Cover of the insurance policy, in favour of the appellants was awarded. 2. The gist of the claim before the Tribunal, in brief, was that on 30.07.2018 at about 8:00-9:00 PM near Shakti Ghat, Kohka, PS Saja, Dist. Bemetara, the deceased Lekhram Patel was traveling as a pillion rider on Motor Cycle bearing registration No. CG-25-E-9012 driven by Respondent No.1 Surendra Patel. The said vehicle was being driven rashly and negligently and dashed against an animal. As a result, the deceased sustained grievous injuries and died during treatment. An FIR was registered at PS Saja in this regard. It was pleaded that the deceased was 24 years of age and was earning Rs.400-500 per day from labour work. A total claim of Rs.33,00,000/- was made under various heads. 3. The learned Tribunal, after considering the evidence and documents available on record, found that the deceased Lekhram Patel was the registered owner of the offending Motor Cycle bearing No. CG-25-E-9012. The vehicle was 3 insured with Respondent No.2/New India Insurance Company Ltd. under a package policy. The Tribunal held that deceased Lekhram Patel, being the owner, do not fall within the category of "third party" under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and therefore are not entitled to compensation under the said provision. The Tribunal further observed that under the package policy, the insurance company had provided Personal Accident Cover of Rs.1,00,000/-. Accordingly, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- to the claimants under the Personal Accident Cover of the insurance policy. Hence, the appeal is for enhancement. 4. Learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant submits that the deceased being a pillion rider is entitled to compensation as a third party. The Tribunal has erred in limiting the compensation to Rs.1,00,000/-. Hence, the impugned award may be set aside and the compensation awarded by the Tribunal may suitably be enhanced. 5. Learned Counsel appearing for Respondent no.2 submits that the claims Tribunal after appreciating the documents available on record rightly awarded the amount of compensation which calls for no interference. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions and perused the entire record minutely. 7. As regards the maintainability of the claim under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the learned Counsel appearing for the Appellants/Claimants submitted that the deceased being a pillion rider is entitled to compensation as a third party. However, it was not disputed that the 4 deceased was the registered owner of the vehicle involved in the accident. No documentary evidence was produced to show that the deceased was not the owner. 8. The Claims Tribunal, keeping in view the fact that the deceased was not a 'third party' in relation to the motorcycle, held that under Policies Ex.NA-1 and Ex.NA-2, the deceased Lekhram was the insured and effectively the owner, with a risk cover of 1,00,000/-. Relying upon the ₹ terms of the package policy Ex.NA-1 and Ex.NA-2, which provides only Personal Accident Cover, the Tribunal awarded 1,00,000/-. In the considered opinion of this ₹ Court, the said finding and assessment by the Tribunal is just and proper and calls for no interference. 9. In view of the above, the contention of the learned Counsel for the Appellant that the Tribunal has erred in limiting the compensation to Rs.1,00,000/- is not acceptable. 10. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the appellants/claimants being devoid of merit is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge -Shubham