1 2026:CGHC:14988 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 446 of 2020 1 - Pandey Ram S/o Maharangi Aged About 48 Years R/o Village- Bhudkela, Post- Jariya, Tahsil And District- Jashpur, Chha&sgarh, District : Jashpur, Chha&sgarh 2 - Smt. Jaimani Bai W/o Shri Pandey Ram Aged About 46 Years R/o Village- Bhudkela, Post- Jariya, Tahsil And District- Jashpur, Chha&sgarh, District : Jashpur, Chha&sgarh 3 - Jayant Kumar S/o Pandey Ram Aged About 22 Years R/o Village- Bhudkela, Post- Jariya, Tahsil And District- Jashpur, Chha&sgarh, District : Jashpur, Chha&sgarh 4 - Ni.esh Kumar S/o Pandey Ram Aged About 20 Years R/o Village- Bhudkela, Post- Jariya, Tahsil And District- Jashpur, Chha&sgarh, District : Jashpur, Chha&sgarh ... Appellants versus 1 - Balkaar Singh Gujjar S/o Shri Khusaal Singh Gujjar Aged About 67 Years R/o Plot No. 142, Baba Buddhaji Nagar, Dr. Ambedkar Marg, Nagpur, Mh 440017 C/o Sumit Duppad, Punjabi Colony, Katora Talab, Raipur District- Raipur Chha&sgarh (Owner), District : Raipur, Chha&sgarh HARNEET KAUR Digitally signed by HARNEET KAUR Date: 2026.04.02 10:53:31 +0530 2 2 - Mangal Singh S/o Massa Singh Aged About 45 Years Occupa.on- Driver, R/o Plot No. 142, Baba Buddhaji Nagar, Dr. Ambedkar Marg, Nagpur, Mh 440017 C/o Sumit Duppad, Punjabi Colony, Katora Talab, Raipur District- Raipur Chha&sgarh (Driver), District : Raipur, Chha&sgarh 3 - Branch Manager/ Divisional Manager United India Insurance Company Limited, Local Branch/ Divisional O=ce, Raigarh, Chha&sgarh (Insurer), District : Raigarh, Chha&sgarh ... Respondents For Appellants : Mr. Rishikant Mahobia, Advocate For Respondent No. 3 : Mr. Anupam Dubey, Advocate SB - Hon'ble Shri Jus-ce Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment on Board 01.04.2026 1. Appellants/claimants have preferred this appeal under Sec.on 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 calling in ques.on the legality, validity and correctness of impugned award dated 21/11/2019 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jashpur in Claim Case No. 08/2019 seeking enhancement of compensa.on. 2. Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants would submit that appellants/claimants No. 1 and 2, being parents of the deceased, are en.tled to get Clial consor.um of Rs. 44,000/- 3 each, which has not been granted by the Claims Tribunal, as such, the amount of compensa.on may suitably be enhanced. 3. Learned counsel for respondent No. 3 would support the impugned award and submit that the compensa.on awarded by the Claims Tribunal is just and proper and does not require any interference by this Court, as such, the instant appeal is liable to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the par.es, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspec.on. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the par.es and having gone through the records, I am of the considered opinion that the appellants/claimants No. 1 and 2, being parents of the deceased, ought to have been granted Rs. 44,000/- each under the head of Clial consor.um, which has not been granted by the Claims Tribunal. Accordingly, the appellants/claimants are held en.tled to addi.onal compensa.on amount of Rs. 88,000/- which will be paid by the respondent No. 3 within 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The addi.onal amount of compensa.on shall carry interest @ 8% per annum from the date of Cling of claim applica.on before the Tribunal 4 i.e. 05/02/2019 .ll its realiza.on. Rest of the condi.ons of the impugned award shall remain intact. 6. Accordingly, the instant appeal is allowed to the extent indicated herein-above. No cost(s). Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Harneet