1 CGHC010025122025 2026:CGHC:39033 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 238 of 2025 Omprakash Singh Mandavi S/o Hajari Prasad Mandavi Aged About 26 Years R/o Village Muchhel, Post Barampur, Police Station And Tahsil Lormi, District Mungeli (C.G.) ... Appellant versus 1 - Umesh Sahu S/o Malik Ram Sahu Aged About 27 Years R/o Pairagpara, Village Pandariya, Tahsil And Post Pandariya, District Kawardha (C.G.) (Driver Of Offending Card Number Cg-10/ad-6938) 2 - Vivek Mishra S/o Ganesh Prasad Aged About 30 Years R/o Gopiband Para, Mahamaya Chowk, Pandariya, Police Station Pandariya, District Kawardha (C.G.) (Owner Of Offending Card Number Cg-10/ad-6938) 3 - Branch Manager The New India Insurance Company Limited, Branch Office Second Floor, Rama Trader Center Infront Of- Rajeev Plaza, Old Bus Stand, Bilaspur, Tahsil And District Bilaspur (C.G.) (Insurer Of Offending Card Number Cg-10/ad-6938) --- Respondent(s) For Appellant/Claimant : Mr. Mohammad Parvez Khan, Advocate For Respondents No.1 & 2 : None For Respondent No.3 : Ms. Swati Agrawal, Adv on behalf of Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2026.09.05 13:47:53 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board (03.09.2026) 1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 1988"] has been preferred by the appellant/claimant seeking enhancement of compensation, challenging the impugned award dated 29.02.2024 passed in Claim Case No. 642/2019, whereby the learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs. 5,000/- as compensation for the injuries sustained by the Appellant in a road accident which occurred on 11.09.2018. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a meagre amount of compensation for the injuries sustained by the appellant. It is, therefore, prayed that the instant appeal be allowed and the compensation awarded by the Tribunal be suitably enhanced. 3. Learned counsel for respondent No. 3/Insurance Company submits that at the time accident, the offending vehicle was not insured with Respondent No.3, therefore, the Claims Tribunal has exonerated Respondent No.3. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their submissions made hereinabove and have perused the record with utmost circumspection. 5. The Claims Tribunal, after appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on record, found that the injured Omprakash Mandavi was treated at the Primary Health Centre, Lormi. No details have been furnished by the appellant regarding the expenses incurred on treatment, etc. It has been found that the appellant/claimant sustained simple injuries in the said 3 accident. Considering that the appellant sustained simple injuries, a compensation amount of Rs. 5,000/- has been awarded by the Claims Tribunal, which in the considered opinion of this Court is just and proper and warrants no interference. 6. In view of the above discussion, I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the impugned award passed by the learned Claims Tribunal. The appeal, being devoid of merit, is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge -Shubham