Smt. P. Neelaveni Vs Saroj Verma

¶1

-1-

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶4

MAC No. 259 of 2024

¶5

1 - Smt. P. Neelaveni W/o Late P. Shankar Rao Aged About 45 Years Resident Of Housing Board Colony, Tatibandh, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh,...(Claimants)

¶6

2 - P. Varlaxmi D/o Late P Shankar Rao Aged About 25 Years Resident Of Housing Board Colony, Tatibandh, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶7

3 - P. Sujata D/o Late P. Shankar Rao Aged About 24 Years Resident Of Housing Board Colony, Tatibandh, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶8

...Appellants

¶9

versus

¶10

1 - Saroj Verma W/o Gajendra Kumar Verma Resident Of Near Ambey Fancy Store, Dhanlaxmi Nagar, Bhanpuri, P.S. Khamtari, Raipur, Raipur District Raipur, Chhattisgarh,.. (Owner And Driver Of Offending Vehicle Bearing Registration No. C.G. 04-Ku-8531)

¶11

2 - The New India Insurance Company Ltd. Through Incharge Officer, Address - Second Floor, Phase-1, L.I.C. Campus Jeevan Beema Marg Pandri, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh,(Insurer Of Offending Vehicle Bearing Registration No. C.G. 04-Ku-8531)

¶12

... Respondents

¶13

For Appellants/Claimants	: Ms. Dhaneshwari Patel, Advocate
For respondent No.2/Insurance Company	: Mr. Dashrath Gupta, Advocate
For respondent No.1	: None appears though served.

¶14

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board

¶15

13.11.2025

¶16

1. The appellants/claimants have filed this appeal for enhancement of compensation against an award passed by the learned Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.), in Claim Case No.1096/2022, dated 28.11.2023 whereby, the learned Tribunal has granted compensation to the tune of Rs.27,07,496/- with interest @ 9% per annum on account of death of P. Shankar Rao.

¶17

-2-

¶18

The facts in brief are that on 12.10.2022, the deceased P. Shankar Rao was going on his bicycle from Heera Power Company Urla, District Raipur to his home and when he reached near Urla Sarora Road, driver of offending vehicle bearing registration No.C.G.04-KU-8531 by driving it rashly and negligently, dashed the bicycle of deceased, resultantly, he sustained grievous injuries over his head, chest, legs and other parts of the body and died during course of treatment. The claimants filed a claim case under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, interalia on the ground that the age of the deceased was 55 years, he was working as Shift Incharge(Operation Process) in Heera Power Industries and earning Rs.27,000/- per month. They claimed a sum of Rs.95,00,000/-. Respondent No.1 owner and driver of the offending vehicle were proceeded as ex-parte. The Insurance Company filed reply and took a plea that the driver of the offending vehicle did not have valid driving licence and the deceased himself was negligent. Learned Tribunal framed issues, parties led evidence and thereafter, an award was passed.

¶19

1. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants would submit that the learned Tribunal has not awarded proper compensation. She would further submit that though the salary slip was produced but the learned Tribunal considered the income of deceased Rs.26,400/- per month. She would contend that on other conventional heads, learned Tribunal awarded meager amount. She would pray to enhance the compensation accordingly.

¶20

1. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company would oppose the submissions made by Ms. Patel. He would submit that the learned Tribunal has passed just and proper compensation. He would contend that the appeal deserves to be dismissed.

¶21

1. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection.

¶22

-3-

¶23

According to salary slip Ex.P/23, the total salary of deceased was Rs.26,400/- per month and the learned Tribunal has considered said figure while computing the compensation, therefore, the contention made by Ms. Patel appears to be misconceived. Learned Tribunal has deducted 1/3rd for personal and living expenses of the deceased looking to the number of the dependents and applied multiplier of 11 looking to the age of the deceased 55 years. Learned Tribunal has further awarded 10% of income towards future prospect and also awarded compensation for loss of estate, funeral expenses and loss of consortium strictly in accordance with law.

¶24

1. Taking into consideration the finding recorded by the learned Tribunal, I do not find any scope for enhancement. Accordingly, this appeal fails and is hereby dismissed . Sd/-

¶25

(Rakesh Mohan Pandey)

¶26

Judge

¶27

Rekha

Smt. P. Neelaveni v. Saroj Verma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. P. Neelaveni v. Saroj Verma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jayman Yadav Vs Nadgu Baghel

Smt. Kunti Paikra Vs Manmohan Paikra

United India Insurance Company Limited, Vs Smt. Bhime Muchaki

The Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd. Vs Umesh

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Ravindra Kumar Rajwade

Kleris Tigga Vs K. Kalyan Rao