1 CGHC010078862020 2026:CGHC:33190 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 540 of 2020 Through, Branch Manager, The Oriental Insurance Company Limited (Zone No-1) The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Jail Road Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. (Insurer Of The Motor Cycle No. C.G. 04 Lc 4505), District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus 1 - Babita Kumari W/o Late Sanjay Singh Thakur Aged About 26 Years R/o Maheshwarpur, Post Office Baikunthpur Thana Bindupur, District Vaishali, Bihar. (Claimants), District : Vaishali, Bihar 2 - Ishan Raj S/o Late Sanjay Singh Thakur Aged About 2 Years Minor Appellant Natural Guardian Mother Babita Kumari Thakur, R/o Maheshwarpur, Post Office Baikunthpur Thana Bindupur, District Vaishali, Bihar., District : Vaishali, Bihar 3 - Ku. Tanaya D/o Late Sanjay Singh Thakur Aged About 7 Years Minor Appellant Natural Guardian Mother Babita Kumari Thakur, R/o Maheshwarpur, Post Office Baikunthpur Thana Bindupur, District Vaishali, Bihar., District : Vaishali, Bihar 4 - Sharda Devi W/o Late Shatrughan Singh Aged About 65 Years R/o Maheshwarpur, Post Office Baikunthpur Thana Bindupur, District Vaishali, Bihar. (Claimants), District : Vaishali, Bihar 5 - Akhilesh Kumar S/o Gupteshwar Mishra Permanent Address Gram Mishrawaliy Post Office And Thana Sahpur, District Bhojpur, Bihar. Present Resident Sai Vihar Colony Siltara Post Office Siltara Thana Dharsiva District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. (Owner And Driver Of The Motor Cycle No. C.G. 04 L C 4505), District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents [Cause-title taken from Case Information System (CIS)] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Insurance Company : Mr. Deepak Gupta, Advocate For Claimants : Mr. R.K. Thakur, Advocate ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Single Bench: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal SAIFAN KHAN Digitally signed by SAIFAN KHAN 2 (Order on Board) 31.07.2026 1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant/Insurance Company under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 challenging award dated 29.06.2019, whereby learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.15,99,400/- alongwith 7% interest PA as compensation to the claimants and the liability to pay the said compensation has been imposed upon the Insurance Company. 2. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company submits that the claims tribunal has erred in fastening the liability to pay compensation upon them, as in the present case, the deceased didn’t died on account of negligence of the driver of the vehicle being CG-04-LC-4505, which is insured with them, indeed, on the date of accident, the deceased while sitting as pillion rider on the said vehicle fell down and thereafter dashed by another vehicle and died on the spot. As such, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the claimant while arguing his cross-objection submits that just and proper compensation has not been awarded to the claimants and same is liable to be enhanced suitably. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the record with utmost circumspection. Appeal of the Insurance Company: 5. So far as the plea of the Insurance Company that in the present 3 case the deceased didn’t died on account of negligence of the driver of the vehicle being CG-04-LC-4505, which is insured with them, indeed, on the date of accident, the deceased while sitting as pillion rider on the said vehicle fell down and thereafter dashed by another vehicle and died on the spot and, as such, the Insurance Company is not liable to pay the compensation is concerned, though the Insurance Company has led evidence of Ritesh Kumar (Witness No.01) and he has also stated that the vehicle being CG-04-LC-4505, which is insured with Insurance Company, was no negligent in the accident in question, but the said witness is not the eye-witness to the incident and he gave the said statement on the basis of the information/documents of the criminal case and, therefore, his statement cannot be relied upon to hold that the deceased died on account of his own or dashed by some other vehicle and the vehicle being CG-04-LC-4505, which is insured with the insurance company, is not responsible for the death of the deceased and, except this, no other evidence has been led to demonstrate the said fact. As such, in absence of any specific evidence, the findings of the learned Claims Tribunal in fastening the liability to pay compensation to the claimants upon the insurance company is correct finding of fact and same is neither perverse nor contrary to the record. I do not find any illegality in said finding which warrants interference. Accordingly, the appeal of the insurance company is liable to be dismissed being meritless. Cross-objection filed by the claimants: 6. The claimants have filed cross-objection seeking enhancement of 4 the amount of compensation on the ground that Claims Tribunal erred in awarding only Rs.70,000/- on the head of loss of consortium, whereas it ought to have been Rs.40,000/- x 4 = Rs.1,60,000/-. As such, in the considered opinion of this Court, to that extent the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal requires to be enhanced. 7. In view of the foregoing analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs.15,99,400/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.16,89,400/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs.15,99,400/-, the appellants are held entitled for an additional amount of Rs.90,000/-. The concerned respondent is directed to deposit the amount of compensation as enhanced by this Court within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 7% per annum from the date of filing of claim application before the Tribunal till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. 8. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the Insurance Company is hereby dismissed and the cross-objection filed by the claimants is allowed in part and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. sd/- (Sanjay K Agrawal) Judge s@if