HARISHCHANDRA DAS MANIKPURI vs BHUNESHWAR SAHU

1

CGHC010146002023 2026:CGHC:46290
NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MAC No. 700 of 2023
1 - Harishchandra Das Manikpuri S/o Santram Manikpuri Aged
About 42 Years R/o Village - Ameri, Devgaon Post - Raigarh, Tahsil
And Thana - Baramkela, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. Presently
Residing At Village - Ranigaon, Ratanpur District Bilaspur,
Chhattisgarh. (Claimant)
2 - Ravi Das Manikpuri S/o Harishchandra Das Manikpuri Aged
About 18 Years R/o Village - Ameri, Devgaon Post - Raigarh, Tahsil
And Thana - Baramkela, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. Presently
Residing At Village - Ranigaon, Ratanpur District Bilaspur,
Chhattisgarh. (Claimant)
3 - Rahul Manikpuri S/o Harishchandra Das Manikpuri Aged About
15 Years Minor Through Natural Guardian Father Harishchandra
Das Manikpuri, R/o Village - Ameri, Devgaon Post - Raigarh, Tahsil
And Thana - Baramkela, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. Presently
Residing At Village - Ranigaon, Ratanpur District Bilaspur,
Chhattisgarh. (Claimant)
--- Appellants
versus
1 - Bhuneshwar Sahu S/o Narangilal Sahu Aged About 40 Years R/o
- Village - Kosamdih, Post - Devgaon, Tahana - Sariya, District
Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. (Driver Of The Offending Vehicle Eicher
Tractor No. C.G. 13/ L / 5933)
2 - Narangilal Sahu S/o Shiv Prasad Sahu, Aged About 68 Years R/o
- House No. 50, Kosamdih, Post - Devgaon, Thana - Sariya, District
Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. (Owner Of The Offending Vehicle Eicher
Tractor No. C.G. 13/ L. /5933)
Digitally signed
by HEERA LAL
SAHU
Date:
2026.11.03
10:16:57
+0530

2
3 - Magma H.D.I. General Insurance Company Limited, Through
Branch Manager, Branch Office, Near - Rajendra Nagar Chowk -
Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. (Insurer Of The Offending Vehicle Eicher
Tractor No. C.G. 13/ L. /5933)
--- Respondents
MAC No. 704 of 2023
1 - Manbodh S/o Bihari Aged About 42 Years R/o Sakinan Ward No.
08, Village Ameri, Devgaon Post Raigarh, Tahsil And Thana
Baramkela District Raigarh Chhattisgarh Presently R/o Village
Ranigaon, Ratanpur District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh
2 - Anjali Seth D/o Manbodh Aged About 15 Years Minor Through
Natural Guardian Father Manbhodh R/o Sakinan Ward No. 08,
Village Ameri, Devgaon Post Raigarh, Tahsil And Thana Baramkela
District Raigarh Chhattisgarh Presently R/o Village Ranigaon,
Ratanpur District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh
3 - Aanand Seth S/o Manbodh Aged About 10 Years Minor Through
Natural Guardian Father Manbodh R/o Sakinan Ward No. 08, Village
Ameri, Devgaon Post Raigarh, Tahsil And Thana Baramkela District
Raigarh Chhattisgarh Presently R/o Village Ranigaon, Ratanpur
District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh
4 - Geeta Seth D/o Manbdh Aged About 5 Years Minor Through
Natural Guardian Father Manbodh R/o Sakinan Ward No. 08, Village
Ameri, Devgaon Post Raigarh, Tahsil And Thana Baramkela District
Raigarh Chhattisgarh Presently R/o Village Ranigaon, Ratanpur
District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh
--- Appellants
Versus
1 - Bhuneshwar Sahu S/o Narangilal Sahu Aged About 40 Years R/o
Village Kosamdih, Post Devgaon, Thana Sariya, District Raigarh
Chhattisgarh (Driver Of The Offending Vehicle Eicher Tractor No.
C.G.13/l/5933)
2 - Narangilal S/o Shiv Prasad Sahu Aged About 68 Years R/o House
No. 50, Kosamdih, Post Devgaon, Thana Sariya, District Raigarh

3
Chhattisgarh (Owner Of The Offending Vehicle Eicher Tractor No.
C.G.13/l/5933)
3 - Magma H.D.I. General Insurance Comapny Limited Through
Branch Manager, Branch Office, Near Rajendra Nagar Chowk,
Bilaspur District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh (Insurer Of The Offending
Vehicle Eicher Tractor No. C.G. 13/l/5933)
--- Respondents
For Appellants : Mr. A.L. Singroul, Advocate in both
the appeals.
For Respondents No.1 & 2 : Mr. Manoj Ku. Jaiswal, Advocate in
both the appeals.
For Respondent No.3 : None.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal
Order on Board
(02.11.2026)
1. Since both appeals arise out of the same accident dated
16.11.2021, they are being heard and disposed of by this
common order.
2. MAC No. 700/2023 , has been preferred under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, "the Act of 1988" ) by the
appellants/claimants assailing the award dated 21.03.2023
th
passed by learned 10 Additional Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, Bilaspur (C.G.), in Claim Case No.1718/2021, whereby
the Tribunal has awarded a total compensation of
Rs.17,12,400/- on account of the death of Ahilya Bai, who
succumbed to the injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident
that occurred on 16.11.2021.
3. MAC No. 704/2023 , has been preferred under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, "the Act of 1988" ) by the
appellants/claimants assailing the award dated 21.03.2023
th
passed by learned 10 Additional Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, Bilaspur (C.G.), in Claim Case No.1719/2021, whereby
the Tribunal has awarded a total compensation of

4
Rs.20,64,880/- on account of the death of Lata Seth, who
succumbed to the injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident
that occurred on 16.11.2021.
4. The facts of the case are that on 16.11.2021, the deceased Ahilya
Bai and Lata Seth, along with their husband and other
labourers, had gone to work at Bhuvaneshwar Sahu's father
Narangi Lal Sahu's place. After threshing paddy with a thresher
machine for about an hour in Bhuvaneshwar Sahu's Bayara
(storehouse), they went to work at his Devlas Tikra Khar
Kosamdih on the request of Bhuvaneshwar Sahu. The deceased
and other labourers were going near the Tikra turn of village
Kosamdih, Devlas Tikra, Mangalu Binjwar, while waiting for
Bhuvaneshwar Sahu at Khar. Then the thresher machine
attached to the Eicher tractor number CG-13-L/5933 got stuck
in a pit in the field, due to which the deceased and other
labourers started pushing the thresher machine to take it out.
When the tractor driver, while driving rashly and carelessly,
suddenly turned the tractor, the thresher machine attached to
the engine of the tractor overturned, in which the deceased Lata
Seth and the deceased Ahilya Manikpuri died due to being
crushed under the thresher machine. A report was lodged with
the concerned police station.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants in both the appeals
submits that the Tribunal has failed to grant the requisite
enhancement of 10% towards the conventional heads, namely
loss of estate, funeral expenses, and consortium, in terms of the
law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. It is, therefore,
submitted that the compensation awarded under the
conventional heads deserves suitable enhancement in
accordance with the settled principles of law. He further submits
that the tribunal has fastened the liability for payment of
compensation upon the respondents No. 1 & 2 (driver & owner),
therefore, he prays that since the deceased died due to being
crushed under the thresher machine and the tractor, which was
attached to the thresher machine, was duly insured with the

5
insurance company/respondent No. 3, the principles of ‘pay and
recover’ may be applied.
6. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for respondents No. 1 & 2
supports the impugned awarded amount and submits that the
compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just, fair and
reasonable and does not warrant any interference by this Court.
7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length, considered
their rival submissions and carefully perused the entire record.
MAC No. 700/2023
8. Upon perusal of the impugned award, it is evident that the
Tribunal has awarded Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate,
Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.40,000/- towards
loss of consortium, aggregating to Rs.1,50,000/- under the
conventional heads. Since the accident occurred on 16.11.2021,
the claimants are entitled to an enhancement of 10% on the
amounts payable under the conventional heads as per National
Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, reported in (2017) 16 SCC
680 . Accordingly, the amounts payable towards loss of estate
and funeral expenses stand enhanced to Rs.16,500/- each, while
the amount payable towards loss of consortium comes to
Rs.44,000/-.
9. It is also not in dispute that there are three claimants. Hence, all
the claimants shall be entitled towards loss of consortium of
Rs.44,000/- each, totalling Rs.1,32,000/-.
10. Thus, the compensation payable under the conventional heads is
recomputed as under:
Loss of Estate : Rs.16,500/-
Funeral Expenses : Rs.16,500/-
Loss of Consortium (Rs.44,000/- × 3) : Rs.1,32,000/-
Total : Rs.1,65,000/-
11. Since the Tribunal has already awarded Rs.1,50,000/- under the
conventional heads, the appellants become entitled to an

6
additional sum of Rs.15,000/- (1,65,000 – 1,50,000) under the
said heads.
12. Consequently, the appellants/claimants shall be entitled to an
additional/enhanced compensation of Rs.15,000/- over and
above the amount awarded by the Tribunal. The enhanced
amount shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the
date of filing of the claim petition till the date of its actual
realization.
MAC No. 704/2023
13. Upon perusal of the impugned award, it is evident that the
Tribunal has awarded Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate,
Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.40,000/- towards
loss of consortium, aggregating to Rs.1,90,000/- under the
conventional heads. Since the accident occurred on 16.11.2021,
the claimants are entitled to an enhancement of 10% on the
amounts payable under the conventional heads as per National
Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, reported in (2017) 16 SCC
680 . Accordingly, the amounts payable towards loss of estate
and funeral expenses stand enhanced to Rs.16,500/- each, while
the amount payable towards loss of consortium comes to
Rs.44,000/-.
14. It is also not in dispute that there are four claimants. Hence, all
the claimants shall be entitled towards loss of consortium of
Rs.44,000/- each, totalling Rs.1,76,000/-.
15. Thus, the compensation payable under the conventional heads is
recomputed as under:
Loss of Estate : Rs.16,500/-
Funeral Expenses : Rs.16,500/-
Loss of Consortium (Rs.44,000/- × 4) : Rs.1,76,000/-
Total : Rs.2,09,000/-
16. Since the Tribunal has already awarded Rs.1,90,000/- under the
conventional heads, the appellants become entitled to an
additional sum of Rs.19,000/- (2,09,000 – 1,90,000) under the

7
said heads.
17. Consequently, the appellants/claimants shall be entitled to an
additional/enhanced compensation of Rs.19,000/- over and
above the amount awarded by the Tribunal. The enhanced
amount shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the
date of filing of the claim petition till the date of its actual
realization.
18. So far as the prayer to apply the principle of ‘pay and recover’ is
concerned, it is clear from the evidence that the offending vehicle
was duly insured with the insurance company. Therefore,
considering the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme
Court in the case of Sunita and Ors. vs. United India
Insurance Co. Ltd and Ors ., reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC
1464 , it is directed that the insurance company shall first pay
the amount of compensation awarded to the
claimants/appellants in both the appeals and then recover the
same from the owner and driver of the offending vehicle.
19. Accordingly, both the appeals stands partly allowed and the
impugned awards are modified to the aforesaid extent.
20. The Registry is directed to communicate the claimants in writing
“the enhanced/additional 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 reside.
Sd/-
(Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal)
Judge
H.L. Sahu