Cholamandlam Ms General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Mahendra Kumar Sahu

¶1

1

2026:CGHC:15879

ASHOK SAHU

NAFR

Digitally signed by ASHOK SAHU Date: 2026.04.07 17:07:11 +0530

¶6

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶7

MAC No. 2304 of 2019

¶8

Cholamandlam MS General Insurance Company Ltd. Through Its Divisional Manager, Hinduja Complex Near Paras Railway Line Devendra Nagar Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. (Insurer)

¶9

... Appellant

¶10

versus

¶11

1 - Mahendra Kumar Sahu, S/o. Khedram Sahu, Aged About 20 Years, R/o. Village- Devri, Post Office Gullu, Police Station- Arang, DistrictRaipur, Chhattisgarh. (Claimant)

¶12

2 - Santosh Bandhe, S/o. Late Sukul Bandhe, R/o. Satya Nagar, Purani Basti, Birgaon, Police Station Urla, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. (Driver)

¶13

3 - Vijay Kant Pandey, S/o. Jamuna Prasad Pandey, R/o. Parmeshwari Nagar Ekta Nagar Gudhiyari, Police Station Gudhiyari, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. (Owner)

¶14

	... Respondents
For Appellant	: Mr. Ghanshyam Patel, Advocate
For Respondent	: Ms. Swati Rani Saraf, Advocate on behalf of
No.1/Claimant	Mr. Devershi Thakur, Advocate.

¶15

2

¶16

(Single Bench)

¶17

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal

¶18

Judgment on Board

¶19

07.04.2026

¶20

The appellant/insurance company has preferred this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 calling in question the legality, validity and correctness of the impugned award dated 04.02.2019 passed by the II nd Additional Motor Accident Claim Tribunal to the 1 st Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Raipur, in MACT No.649/2016, by which the claim application of the claimant has been allowed and liability to pay the amount of compensation has been fastened upon the insurance company.

¶21

Mr. Ghanshyam Patel, learned counsel for the appellant/insurance company, would submit that the quantum is excessive, therefore, it deserves to be reduced suitably.

¶22

Ms. Swati Rani Saraf, learned counsel appearing for the claimant/ respondents No.1, would support the impugned award and submit that the income of the claimant has been taken as Rs. 6,000/- per month and claimant was tutor, therefore, his income ought to have been taken as Rs. 7,500/- per month.

¶23

Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and gone through the records meticulously.

¶24

3

¶25

After hearing learned counsel ap pearing for the parties and after going through the re co rd, this Court is re-computing the compensation as below:-

¶26

Heads	Compensation awarded by the Tribunal	Compensation awarded by this Court
Loss of income	Rs. 6,000/- per month = Rs.72,000/- per annum	Rs. 7,500/- per month = Rs.90,000/- per annum
Future prospects @ 40%	Nil	Rs. 90,000 + Rs. 36,000 = Rs. 1,26,000/-
Disability 61%	-	Rs. 76,860/-
Multiplier	Rs. 72,000 x 18 = Rs. 12,96,000/-	Rs. 76,860 x 18 = Rs. 13,83,480/-
Medical Expenses	Rs. 2,15,328/-	Rs. 2,15,328/-
Pain & Suffering	Rs. 15,000/-	Rs. 30,000/-
Loss of Amenities	Nil	Rs. 30,000/-
Special Diet	Rs. 15,000/-	Rs. 20,000/-
Traveling Expenses	Rs. 7,500/-	Rs. 15,000/-
Assistant	Nil	Rs. 15,000/-
Future Medical Expenses	Nil	Rs. 20,000/-
Total	Rs. 15,48,828/-	Rs. 17,28,808/-

¶27

4

¶28

In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs. 15,48,828/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 17,28,808/- . Hence, after deducting the amount of compensation already awarded i.e. Rs. 15,48,828/- , the claimant is entitled for an additional amount of Rs. 1,79,980/- . The concerned respondent is directed to deposit the amount of compensation as enhanced by this Court within a period of 45 days. The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of claim application before the Tribunal till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact.

¶29

In the result, the appeal of insurance company and cross-objection of the claimant both are disposed of with the aforesaid terms.

¶30

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge

¶31

Ashok

Cholamandlam Ms General Insurance Company Ltd. v. Mahendra Kumar Sahu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Cholamandlam Ms General Insurance Company Ltd. v. Mahendra Kumar Sahu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.P.Verma Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Mithila Yadav Vs Krishnachandra Pandey

The National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Dhaniram Yadav

Dashru Ram Markam Vs Puranik Lal Deshmukh

Smt. Kaleshwari Nirmalkar Vs Tulesh Vaishnav

Ratan Singh Sivana Vs Nirmal Kumar