SMT. CHITRAREKHA KAUSHIK vs SHRI PARMESHWAR SAHU

1

CGHC010063262023 2026:CGHC:39178
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MAC No. 286 of 2023
1 - Smt. Chitrarekha Kaushik W/o Late Shri Mathura Prasad Kaushik
Aged About 38 Years R/o Village Parsada, Tahsil And District Bilaspur
(C.G.)
2 - Ku. Yamini Kaushik D/o Late Shri Mathura Prasad Kaushik Aged
About 15 Years (Now Aged About 23 Years), R/o Village Parsada, Tahsil
Digitally
signed by
ABHIGYA
SAXENA
ABHIGYA
SAXENA
And District Bilaspur (C.G.)
3 - Harsh Kaushik S/o Late Shri Mathura Prasad Kaushik Aged About
12 Years (Now Aged About 20 Years) R/o Village Parsada, Tahsil And
District Bilaspur (C.G.)
... Appellants
versus
1 - Shri Parmeshwar Sahu S/o Shri Malikram Sahu Aged About 30
Years R/o Village Mangla Tahsil And District Bilaspur (C.G.) (Vehicle
Owner And Driver)
2 - Shri Nanku @ Ashok Kumar Gond S/o Shri Latel Aged About 25
Years R/o Village Mangla Tahsil And District Bilaspur (C.G.)
3 - Branch Manager I.C.I.C.I. Lombard Motor Insurance V.R. Plaza, Link
Road, Bilaspur (C.G.) (Insurance Company)
... Respondent(s)

For Appellants : Mr. Rama Kant Pandey, Advocate
For Respondent No.3 : Mr. KPS Gandhi, Advocate
For Respondents No.1 & 2 : None.

2
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal
Judgment on Board
07.09.2026
1. Heard on I.A. No.01/2023 – an application for condonation of
delay.
2. Upon due consideration and for the reasons assigned in the
application, the same is allowed and delay of 262 days in filing the
appeal is hereby condoned.
3. Heard on admission.
4. Admit.
5. With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally.
6. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
(for short the "Act of 1988") has been preferred by the
appellants/claimants seeking enhancement of the amount of
compensation, challenging the impugned award dated
rd
12.02.2021, passed in MACT No.398/2015 by learned 3
Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur C.G., whereby
the learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of
Rs.37,73,000/- as compensation for the death of Mathura Prasad
Kaushik, who died in a road accident which took place on
27.04.2015.
7. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants submits that the
learned Claims Tribunal has erred in awarding an inadequate

3
amount of compensation in the facts and circumstances of the
present case. He fairly submits that, although the learned Claims
Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the deceased, it has
erred in awarding an inadequate amount of compensation under
the other conventional heads. It is, therefore, submitted that the
compensation awarded under those heads deserves suitable
enhancement. Accordingly, it is prayed that the instant appeal be
allowed and the compensation awarded by the learned Claims
Tribunal be suitably enhanced.
8. Learned counsel for respondent No.3/insurance company would
submit that the Claims Tribunal after appreciating oral and
documentary evidence available on record rightly awarded the
compensation amount. Hence, the compensation awarded by the
Claims Tribunal is just and proper and requires no interference.
9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival
submissions made herein-above and went through the records
with utmost circumspection.
10. In the case at hand, it is true that the learned Claims Tribunal
has assessed the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.23,463/-,
which, in the considered opinion of this Court, has been rightly
assessed. However, under the other conventional heads, the
learned Tribunal has awarded a total sum of only Rs.1,00,000/-,
whereas the appellants are entitled to a sum of Rs.1,90,000/-
under the said heads. To that extent, the impugned award

4
deserves to be modified and the compensation suitably enhanced.
11. Thus, in light of the aforesaid discussion and in light of the
judgments of the Supreme Court rendered in the matters of
1
National Insurance Company Ltd. V. Pranay Sethi , Sarla
2
Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Ors and
Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru
3
Ram & Ors , this Court is computing the compensation as below:-
Compensation
awarded by the
Compensation
awarded by this
Sr.
Heads
No.
Tribunal
Court
1 Total Loss of
Rs.31,73,000 Rs.31,73,000
Dependency
2. Treatment
Rs.5,00,000/- Rs.5,00,000/-
Expenditure
3. Funeral
Rs.45,000 Rs.15,000/-
Expenditure
4. Loss of Estate Rs.15,000/- Rs.15,000/-
5 Loss of
Rs.40,000/- Rs.1,20,000/-
Consortium
Total Rs. 37,73,000/- Rs. 38,23,000/-
12. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of
Rs.37,73,000/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to
Rs.38,23,000/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of
Rs.37,73,000/-, the appellants are held entitled for an additional
amount of Rs.50,000/- . The additional amount of compensation
shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from filing of the claim
application before the Claims Tribunal till its realization. Rest of
the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact.
1 (2017) 16 SCC 680
2 (2009) 6 SCC 121
3 (2018) 18 SCC 130

5
13. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed and the impugned
award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above.
14. The Registry is directed to communicate the claimants in writing
“the enhanced amount” in this appeal as against the award made
by the concerned Tribunal. The said communication be made in
Hindi Deonagri language and the help of paralegal workers may
be availed with a co-ordination of Secretary, Legal Aid of the
concerned area wherein the claimants resides.
Sd/-
(Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal)
Judge
Saxena