Chattisgarh High Court
Smt. Pancho Bai Nishad vs Mansingh Sahu on 27 April, 2026
Digitally
signed by
ASHISH
ASHISH TIWARI
TIWARI Date:
2026.04.30
12:55:52
+0530
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
M.A.(C) No. 243 of 2021
1 - Smt. Pancho Bai Nishad, W/o Late Mohan Nishad, aged about 52 years, R/o
Village Boirgaon, Police Station Khallari, Tahsil Baghbahara, District Mahasamund
Chhattisgarh
2 - Tikeshwar Nishad, S/o Late Mohan Nishad, aged about 28 years, R/o Village
Boirgaon, Police Station Khallari, Tahsil Baghbahara, District Mahasamund
Chhattisgarh
3 - Smt. Indrani Nishad, W/o Chamman Nishad, aged about 35 years, and D/o Late
Mohan Nishad, R/o Village Pidhi, Police Station Tumgaon, Tahsil And District
Mahasamund Chhattisgarh (Applicant /claimants)
--- Appellants
Versus
1 - Mansingh Sahu, S/o Mohan Lal Sahu, aged about 24 years, R/o Village Charouda,
Police Station Khallari, Tahsil Bagbahara, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh (Non
Applicant No. 01)
..... (Driver of Vehicle Platina Bearing Registration No. Cg
06/ge/4672)
2 - Prabhu Lal Sahu, S/o Late Ghanaram Sahu, aged about 55 years, R/o Village
Dhansuli, Ward No. 07, Police Station, Tahsil And District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh
(Non-Applicant No. 02)
..... (Registered Owner of Vehicle Platina Bearing Registration No. Cg 06/ge/4672)
3 - The Branch Manager The Shriram General Insurance Company Limited, Through
Branch Manager, Branch Office, Maruti Height Building, 4th Floor, Mohaha Bazar,
Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh (Non-Applicant No. 03)
..... (Insurer Of Vehicle Platina Bearing Registration No. Cg 06/ge/4672)
--- Respondents
_____________________________________________________________________
For Appellants : Ms. Pooja Yadav, Advocate appeared on
behalf of Shri Shivendu Pandya, Advocate.
For Respondent Nos.1 & 2 : Shri Kripesh G. Kela, Advocate.
_____________________________________________________________________
Hon’ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput
Order on Board
27.04.2026
1. This appeal has been filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for
short ‘MV Act‘) by the appellants / Claimants have challenged the legality,
correctness and judicial propriety of the award dated 05.03.2020 passed by I
-2-
Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for short “Tribunal”), District –
Mahasamund (C.G.) in Claim Case No. H-127/2018.
2. By the impugned award, against a claim of Rs. 31,92,000/-, the learned Tribunal
has awarded a sum of Rs. 5,16,000/-, along with interest at the rate of 7% per
annum, as compensation in favour of the appellants/claimants on account of the
death of deceased Narendra Nishad in an accident that took place on
18.12.2017, due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle,
namely Platina motorcycle bearing registration No. CG/06-GE/4672, driven by
respondent No. 1, owned by respondent No. 1, and insured with respondent No.
2 (Insurance Company).
3. As per pleadings in the claim application filed under section 166 of the MV Act
by the appellants/claimants, on the date of accident i.e. 18.12.2017 the
deceased Narendra Nishad was coming toward Boergaon riding his motor-cycle,
when he reached near near Village – Charoda road Kukri Nala, the driver of the
offending vehicle by rash and negligent driving dashed the motorcycle of the
deceased from behind, as a result of which he fell down and sustained severe
injuries and died on the spot. The accident was reported to Police Station
Khallari and offence was registered against the driver of the offending vehicle.
4. As per further pleadings the deceased was aged about 23 years, mason and
was earning his livelihood at the rate of Rs.400/- per day.
5. The claim application was resisted by the respondent on various grounds
including Insurance Company took a plea that the driver of the offending vehicle
was not holding valid and effective driving license and there is a violation of
terms and condition of Insurance Policy, therefore the insurance company may
be exonerated.
-3-
6. On the basis of above broad pleadings, the learned Tribunal framed five issues
and decided the same in favour of the appellants/claimants and awarded the
above stated compensation.
7. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that deceased was aged about 23
years, mason, the learned Claims Tribunal has only assessed monthly income to
Rs.4500/- per month, thus suitable enhancement would be made.
8. Learned counsel for respondent support the award and submits that the just
compensation has been awarded which does not require any interference.
9. Heard the learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions and
also perused the record.
10. According to the appellants/claimants the deceased was a mason, working at
Mahasamund and their widow mother depending upon his income. In the
opinion of this Court assessment of monthly income of the deceased to
Rs.4500/- by the learned Claims Tribunal is on the lower side. Thus taking into
facts and circumstances of the case and evidence available on record, minimum
wages prevailing at that point of time; number of dependents and nature of job.
This Court assesses the notional monthly income of the deceased to Rs.8000/-.
In view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matters of Smt. Sarla
Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr., (2009) 6 SCC 121 &
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC 680 and
Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd.v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors;
(2018) 18 SCC 130, the claimants are entitled for compensation in the following
manner:-
S.No. Head Calculation
1. Income of the deceased @ Rs.96,000/-
8000/- per month (8000 X 12)
2. Future prospect 40% Rs.34,800/-
2. Total annual Income Rs.1,34,400/-
-4-
(96,000 +34800)
3. After ½ deduction towards Rs.67200/-
personal and living (134400 - 67200)
expenses of the deceased
4. Multiplier of 18 to be Rs.12,09,600/-
applied (67,200 x 18)
5. Towards loss of estate and Rs.30,000/- (15,000 + 15,000)
funeral expenses
6. Filial consortium to Rs.40,000/-
appellant No.1
Total compensation Rs. 12,79,600/-
11. Since the tribunal has already awarded Rs.05,16,000/-, after deducting the same
from the above amount, the claimants are held entitled for additional
compensation of Rs.7,63,600/- with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of
appeal i.e. 10/03/2021. The amount shall be deposited within a period of 60
days from the date of receipt of copy of this order by the respondent
No.3/Insurance Company.
12. After deposit Rs.6,00,000/- shall be invested as fixed deposit in a
Nationalized Bank in the name of appellant No.1 for a period of 2 years. For
remaining amount, the learned Tribunal would pass appropriate order with
regard to it’s apportionment and disbursement.
13. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part with modification in the award
impugned to the above extent.
Sd/-
Sd/-
(Sachin Singh Rajput)
Judge
-/ Ashish
