Hira Sahu Vs Gaurav Bhardwaj

¶1

1

¶2

Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2025.04.03 12:32:20 +0530

¶3

2025:CGHC:15439

¶4

NAFR

¶5

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

MAC No. 854 of 2018

¶7

1 - Hira Sahu D/o Late Ramrakha Sahu Aged About 36 Years R/o Ganoud, Vishrampur, P.O. Tulsi Manpur, P.S. Mandir Hasod, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶8

2 - Prembati Bai D/o Late Ramrakha Sahu Aged About 35 Years R/o Ganoud, Vishrampur, P.O. Tulsi Manpur, P.S. Mandir Hasod, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶9

3 - Anupa Sahu D/o Late Ramrakha Sahu Aged About 34 Years R/o Ganoud, Vishrampur, P.O. Tulsi Manpur, P.S. Mandir Hasod, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶10

4 - Rukmani Sahu D/o Late Ramrakha Sahu Aged About 33 Years R/o Ganoud, Vishrampur, P.O. Tulsi Manpur, P.S. Mandir Hasod, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶11

5 - Rekha Sahu D/o Late Ramrakha Sahu Aged About 31 Years R/o Ganoud, Vishrampur, P.O. Tulsi Manpur, P.S. Mandir Hasod, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶12

6 - Nandani Sahu D/o Late Ramrakha Sahu Aged About 30 Years R/o Ganoud, Vishrampur, P.O. Tulsi Manpur, P.S. Mandir Hasod, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶13

7 - Durga Sahu D/o Late Ramrakha Sahu Aged About 28 Years R/o Ganoud, Vishrampur, P.O. Tulsi Manpur, P.S. Mandir Hasod, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶14

8 - Sangeeta Sahu D/o Late Ramrakha Sahu Aged About 26 Years R/o Ganoud, Vishrampur, P.O. Tulsi Manpur, P.S. Mandir Hasod, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶15

2

¶16

... Appellants/Claimants

¶17

versus

¶18

• Gaurav Bhardwaj S/o Mochan Bhardwaj Aged About 26 Years R/o House No. 127, Pt. Ravishankar Ward, Station Road, Beisde I.C.I.C.I. Bank Mahasamund, P.S. And District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh (Driver And Registered Owner Of Offending Vehicle Bolero No. C.G.-06-0099).

¶19

... Respondent

¶20

For Appellants/Claimants : Mr. Akhilesh Mishra, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr. Punit Ruparel, Advocate.

¶21

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board

¶22

( 02.04.2025 )

¶23

This appeal arises out of the award dated 15.01.2018 passed by learned 2^nd Additional Judge to the court of 1^st Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur (C.G.), in Claim Case No. 341/2016 awarding a compensation of Rs.50,000/- in favour of the appellants/claimants for their irreparable loss.

¶24

The averment in the claim petition, in brief, was that on 08.05.2016, deceased Dherhin Bai, along with her husband Ramrakha Sahu, was coming to village Ganoud from Arang on the vehicle TVS Excel. On the way, when they reached near Lakholi Dhamar Plant at N.H. 53, the vehicle bearing registration No. CG-06-G-0099, driving by respondent No. 1 in a rash and negligent manner, dashed the TVS Excel from back backside as a result of which the deceased and her husband got multiple grievous injuries, which resulted in their death on the spot. Thereafter, a case bearing FIR

¶25

3

¶26

No. 179/2016 under Section 304A of IPC was registered in Police Station Arang, District Raipur against the respondent. It is pleaded before the Tribunal that the deceased Dherhin Bai was aged about 51 years and was earning Rs. 10-15 thousand per month by manufacturing Agarbatti in village Gonoud. Therefore, a claim application under Section 166 of M.V. Act has been filed by the claimants claiming a total compensation of Rs. 25,00,000/

¶27

When the claim application for compensation was filed by daughters of deceased Dherhin Bai before the claims tribunal against the driver/owner of the alleged vehicle the tribunal found that the claimants are legal heirs of the deceased, but they are married daughters of deceased and were not dependents on the deceased, therefore, only lump sump amount of Rs. 50,000/- has been awarded in favour of the claimants/appellants. Hence, this appeal for enhancement.

¶28

Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side and needs to be enhanced suitably. He further submits that the claimants have pleaded the income of the deceased as Rs. 10-15 thousand per month, as the deceased was involved in the work of manufacturing agarwatti, but the learned Tribunal has not considered the income of the deceased. He also submits that the tribunal has erred in not considering the appellants as dependent on the deceased. The appellants are entitled to get compensation on the head of loss of love and affection, and on the head of loss of estate and funeral expenses, therefore, this appeal may be allowed and needs to be enhanced suitably.

¶29

4

¶30

On the other hand, it has argued on behalf of the counsel for respondent that in the facts and circumstances of case, the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is just and proper and requires no further enhancement.

¶31

Heard counsel for the parties and perused the documents on record.

¶32

In a motor accident claim case, what is important is that, the compensation to be awarded by the Courts/Tribunals should be just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the case. It should neither be a meager amount of compensation, nor a Bonanza.

¶33

Now this Court shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.50,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the given facts and circumstances of the case.

¶34

In the instant case, taking into consideration the evidence and material available on record it is clear that the appellants/claimants are legal heirs of the deceased Dherhin Bai, but is it is also clear that all are married daughters of the deceased and the appellants neither in the claim petition nor in their sworn statement have stated that they were dependent on the deceased, even they have not given any evidence or documents to prove their dependency upon the deceased. Therefore, the Tribunal has rightly held that the appellants/claimants were not dependent upon the deceased. However, as per National Insurance Company Ltd., Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others, (2017) 16 SCC 680 , the claimants are entitled for loss of estate of Rs. 15,000/-, for funeral expenses Rs. 15,000/- and as per Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nanu, reported

¶35

5

¶36

in AIR Online 2018 SC 189 , the claimants are further entitled for loss of love and affection Rs. 40,000/- each i.e. Rs. 3,20,000/-. Therefore, the claimants would become entitled for total compensation of Rs. 3,50,000/-.

¶37

Thus, the total compensation is recomputed as Rs. 3,50,000/-. After deducting Rs. 50,000/- as awarded by the Claims Tribunal, the enhancement would be Rs. 3,00,000/-.

¶38

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed . The claimants shall be entitled to Rs. 3,00,000/- in addition to what has already been awarded by the claims Tribunal. The enhanced amount shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of enhancement of the award till its realization. The impugned award stands modified to the above extent and rest of the conditions shall remain intact.

¶39

The Registry is further directed to communicate the claimants in writing “the enhanced amount” in this appeal as against the award made by the Tribunal below. The said communication be made in Hindi Deonagri language and the help of paralegal workers may be availed with a coordination of Secretary, Legal Aid of the concerned area wherein the claimants resides.

¶40

Sd/-

¶41

(Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge

¶42

H. L. Sahu

Hira Sahu v. Gaurav Bhardwaj

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hira Sahu v. Gaurav Bhardwaj

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhoku @ Puran Chand Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Nuklesh Satnami @ Tetku Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Yashwant @ Ashwan Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ramnarayan Kevat Vs Jayanti Bai

Radha Krishna Motwani Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Meera Bai Nag Vs Shridharan Nair