SANTOSH DAS MANIKPURI vs GANESH SENGAR

1

CGHC010340262025 2026:CGHC:46437
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MAC No. 1765 of 2025
1 - Santosh Das Manikpuri S/o Maruti Das, Aged About 57
Years R/o Village Podibhantha, Ward No. 01, P.S. Akaltara,
District Janjgir Champa (C.G.)
2 - Tanuj Das Manikpuri, S/o Santosh Das Manikpuri, Aged
About 15 Years Minor Through Legal Natural Guardian Father
Santosh Das Manikpuri, R/o Village Podibhantha, Ward No. 01,
P.S. Akaltara, District Janjgir Champa (C.G.)
... Appellants
versus
1 - Ganesh Sengar S/o Mahadev Sengar, Aged About 55 Years
R/o Nagar Nigam Sirgitti, Ward No. 10, District Bilaspur
Chhattisgarh At Present Resident Of Sukulpara, Kharaud, P.S.
Shivrinarayan District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh........(Driver
Of Offending Vehicle Excent Car Bearing Registration No. C.G.-
11/A.C./7111)
2 - Naresh Sengar, S/o Mahadev Sengar, R/o Sakti, P.S. Sakti
District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh (Now District Sakti)..........
(Owner Of Offending Vehicle Excent Car Bearing Registration No.
C.G.-11/A.C./7111)
3 - Branch Manager, Reliance General Insurance Company Pvt.
Ltd. Branch Office Bus Stand Road, Vyapar Vihar Road 4.1,
Tushar Goyal And Insurance Company Bilaspur H-04.8, L.I.C.
Office India, Mangla- 4.3, National Insurance Company Bilaspur,
P.S. Civil Line Tahsil And District Bilaspur (C.G.)...........(Insurer
Digitally signed
by HEERA LAL
SAHU
Date:
2026.11.03
15:09:39
+0530

2
Of Offending Vehicle Excent Car Bearing Registration No. C.G.-
11/A.C./7111)
... Respondents

For Appellant : Mr. Pawan Kumar Kashyap, Adv.
For Respondent No. 1 : Ms. Pooja Yadav, Adv.
For Respondents No. 2 & 3 : Notice remained unserved.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal
Order On Board
03/11/2026
1.
Heard on I.A. No.01/2025, application for condonation of
delay in filing the appeal.
2. It is a claimant’s appeal seeking enhancement of the
compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
3. Upon due consideration, I.A. No. 01/2025 is allowed and the
delay of 247 days in filing the appeal stands condoned.
4. Also heard on admission.
5. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act,
1988 (for short, "the Act of 1988") has been preferred by the
injured appellant assailing the award dated 31.08.2024
th
passed by the 10 Additional Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, District Bilaspur (CG) in Motor Accident Claim
Case No. 311/2021, whereby a total compensation of
12,951/- has been awarded for the injuries sustained by
₹
appellant No. 2 – Tanuj Das Manikpuri in a road accident
that occurred on 18.07.2020.
6. Learned Tribunal, after appreciating the oral and
documentary evidence brought on record, assessed the

3
compensation as under:
S.N. Head Calculation
1 Towards medical expenses 9,951/-
Towards physical and
2 3,000/-
mental agony
Total Awarded Amount Rs.12,951/-
7. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Tribunal
has erred in awarding a lesser amount of compensation. It
is also submitted that the injured, Tanuj Das (15 years old),
who is a minor boy, sustained injuries to his head, brain,
chest, hand, waist, leg and other parts of the body, but the
Tribunal has not awarded compensation towards loss of
income, transport expenses, special diet, attendant and
future treatment expenses. Accordingly, it is prayed that
the impugned award be modified by suitably enhancing the
compensation.
8. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 1 supported
the impugned award.
9. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
record.
10. As to the loss of income, Santosh Das (AW-1), the father of
the injured, admitted that his son was not working;
therefore, it cannot be assumed that the injured was
working. So far as the compensation awarded on other
heads is concerned, the Tribunal, upon appreciation of the

4
evidence on record, has found that the injured sustained
only simple injuries. As evidenced by Ex. P-6 and Ex. P-7,
the injured has not been admitted to any hospital, nor has
he sustained any grievous injuries. The injured produced
medical bills totalling Rs. 9,951/- (Ex. P-6 and Ex. P-7),
which were duly considered by the Claims Tribunal.
11. In view of the aforesaid facts and upon a careful
examination of the evidence on record, and further
considering the overall simple injuries and the medical
expenses, this Court finds the impugned award just and
proper and not warranting any further enhancement.
12. Consequently, the appeal, being devoid of merit, is
dismissed at motion stage.
Sd/-
( Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal)
JUDGE
H.L. Sahu