The Oriental Insurance Company Limited Vs… — Motor Accident Claims | Chhattisgarh HC (2025)

The Oriental Insurance Company Limited Vs… — Motor Accident Claims | Chhattisgarh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the Tractor Trolley bearing Registration No. CG 04 D-7822 was falsely implicated and was not involved in the accident causing the death of Jagdev Patel (as urged by the appellant-insurer). +1 more

Court's answer

The learned Claims Tribunal clearly recorded its finding relying upon the statement of the insurance company's own witness Indranarayan Mishra (DW-3), who stated in cross-examination that the tractor and trolley were both insured by the company on the date of the accident and that the driver's driving licence (Ex. P/20) is valid upto 12/11/2031.

Ratio / Principle

Taking the monthly income of the deceased mason (rajmistri) Jagdev Patel at Rs. 7,500/- (Rs. 90,000/- per annum), applying a multiplier of 15, and adding the annual dependency of Rs. 60,000/- for the wife, Rs. 40,000/- as loss of consortium, Rs. 15,000/- as loss of estate and Rs. 15,000/- as funeral expenses, the Tribunal's award of Rs. 9,70,000/- with interest at 6% per annum is absolutely just and proper.

Key takeaways

The award embodies a pure and simple finding of fact which is neither perverse nor contrary to the record and does not warrant any interference by this Court.ratio¶26

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Motor Accidents Appeal (S. 173, Motor Vehicles Act, 1988) — The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. v. Dukalhin Bai Patel and others, MAC No. 133 of 2022, High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur (Single Bench), Sanjay K. Agrawal J., decided 18.07.2025 [2025:CGHC:34189]: Insurer's appeal against the award dated 23/09/2021 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kabirdham (Claim Case No. 74/2019), whereby Rs. 9,70,000/- with 6% per annum interest was granted to respondents 1 and 2 for the death of Jagdev Patel (mason/rajmistri, aged about 40) in an accident involving Tractor Trolley CG 04 D-7822. Insurer contended the trolley was falsely implicated and the compensation excessive; respondent No. 3 (driver Jaitram Narang) supported the insurer. The Court noted the Tribunal's finding rested on the statement of the insurer's own witness Indranarayan Mishra (DW-3), who admitted in cross-examination that both tractor and trolley were insured on the date of the accident and that the driver's licence (Ex. P/20) was valid upto 12/11/2031; quantum was computed on monthly income of Rs. 7,500/- (Rs. 90,000/- per annum), multiplier 15, plus Rs. 60,000/- annual dependency, Rs. 40,000/- loss of consortium, Rs. 15,000/- loss of estate and Rs. 15,000/- funeral expenses. Held the award 'absolutely just and proper' — a pure and simple finding of fact, neither perverse nor contrary to the record, warranting no interference. Appeal dismissed, no costs.

1

2025:CGHC:34189

HARNEET KAUR

NAFR

Digitally signed by HARNEET KAUR Date: 2025.07.22 10:46:31 +0530

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

MAC No. 133 of 2022

The Oriental Insurance Company Limited B.C. Kawardha, Through Amarjeet Singh Chhabda, Deepak Cycle Stores, New Bus Stand Kawardha, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh.

… Appellant

versus

1 - Dukalhin Bai Patel W/o Jagdev Patel Aged About 39 Years R/o Village Motiyari , Police Station Kawardha, Tahsil Kawardha, Dsitrict Kabirdham Chhatitsgarh. 2 - Chandrashekhar S/o Jagdev Patel Aged About 21 Years R/o Village Motiyari , Police Station Kawardha, Tahsil Kawardha, Dsitrict Kabirdham Chhatitsgarh. 3 - Jaitram Narang S/o Chhabilal Narang Aged About 36 Years R/o Village Khuntu, Police Station And Tahsil Kawardha , District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh. 4 - Shobharam S/o Mehtar Banjare Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Mudiyapara, Police Station And Tahsil Bodla , District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh.

... Respondents

2

For Appellant	:Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate
For Respondents 1 & 2	:None, though served
For Respondent No. 3	:Mr. Vaibhav A. Goverdhan, Advocate

SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment On Board

18.07.2025

1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “Act of 1988”) has been preferred by the appellant (Insurance Company) challenging the impugned award dated 23/09/2021 passed by Learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kabirdham in Claim Case No. 74/2019, whereby Rs. 9,70,000/- has been awarded as compensation to respondents No. 1 and 2/claimants for the death of their husband and father, respectively, namely Jagdev Patel, aged about 40 years, who was working as a mason (rajmistri).

2. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the vehicle in question i.e. the Tractor Trolley bearing Registration No. CG 04 D-7822 has been falsely implicated and it was not involved in the accident due to which the death of Jagdev Patel occurred. He would further submit that the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is

3

on the higher side, therefore, the instant appeal be allowed and the impugned award be reduced.

3. Learned counsel for respondent No. 3 would support the submission made by learned counsel for the appellant.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their submissions and perused the record.

5. Learned Claims Tribunal, after appreciation of oral and documentary evidence on record, has clearly recorded a finding relying upon the statement of Indranarayan Mishra (DW-3), witness of appellant (insurance company), who has stated in his cross-examination that the tractor and trolley both were insured by their company on the date of the accident and the driving license of driver/respondent No. 3 herein (Ex. P/20) is valid upto 12/11/2031, therefore, taking the monthly income of deceased Jagdev Patel, who was working as a mason (rajmistri), to be Rs. 7,500/- and Rs. 90,000/- per annum and applying a multiplier of 15 and further adding the annual dependency of Rs. 60,000/for his wife respondent No. 1 herein, Rs. 40,000/- as loss of consortium, Rs. 15,000/- as loss of estate and Rs. 15,000/- as funeral expenses, has proceeded to award Rs. 9,70,000/- as compensation with an interest of 6% per annum, which in my considered opinion, is absolutely just and proper. It is a pure and simple finding of fact which is

4

neither perverse nor contrary to the record. It does not

warrant any interference by this Court.

6. Accordingly, the instant appeal is liable to be and is hereby

dismissed. No cost(s).

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge

Harneet