Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Pramod Das Vs Asheshwar Yadav — Motor Accident Claims | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

Home
Chhattisgarh HC
2026
Pramod Das Vs Asheshwar YadavPramod Das v. Asheshwar Yadav

Dismissed¶32

Pramod Das v. Asheshwar Yadav

Chhattisgarh HC1 Apr 2026MAC/842/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

MAC appeal No. 842 of 2023; High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur; Justice Sachin Singh Rajput; 02.04.2026; Section 173 MV Act appeal; Section 166 MV Act claim; award dated 12.12.2022; 12th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Raipur; MACT case No. 736/2019; death of Neeraj Kumar aged 19; motorcycle hit by Truck CG-04-JA-6017; accident 11.07.2022; claimed Rs. 22,30,000/-; pleaded income Rs. 12,000/- per month; awarded Rs. 12,56,360/-; assessed income Rs. 7,800/-; 40% future prospects; one-half personal expenses deduction; multiplier 18; loss of consortium Rs. 44,000/-; loss of estate Rs. 16,500/-; funeral expenses Rs. 16,500/-; enhancement refused; no perversity illegality material irregularity; appeal dismissed; appellants Pramod Das, Saroj Tiwari; respondents Asheshwar Yadav, Geeta Devi; advocates S. P. Sahu, Rakesh Kumar Thakur.

What did the court decide?

No relief granted; the appeal was dismissed as devoid of merit and the impugned award was left undisturbed.

Why is it important?

The learned Tribunal appropriately assessed the income of the deceased in the absence of cogent evidence, and the award does not suffer from any perversity, illegality or material irregularity warranting interference by this Court. ¶31

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No relief granted; the appeal was dismissed as devoid of merit and the impugned award was left undisturbed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal is inadequate (on the lower side) and requires enhancement by this Court.

Court's answer

The learned Tribunal appropriately assessed the income of the deceased in the absence of cogent evidence, and the award does not suffer from any perversity, illegality or material irregularity warranting interference by this Court.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

MAC No. 842 of 2023, High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur, decided 02.04.2026 by Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput. An appeal under S.173 MV Act by appellants Pramod Das and Saroj Tiwari (addressed throughout the judgment as appellants/claimants) against respondents Asheshwar Yadav and Geeta Devi challenged the award dated 12.12.2022 of the 12th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur (MACT case No. 736/2019), which granted Rs. 12,56,360/- for the death of Neeraj Kumar, aged about 19, killed when his motorcycle was hit by Truck CG-04-JA-6017 in an accident on 11.07.2022. Claimants had sought Rs. 22,30,000/- and argued the award was on the lower side. Holding that the Tribunal appropriately assessed the deceased's monthly income at Rs. 7,800/- in the absence of cogent evidence (adding 40% future prospects, deducting one-half personal expenses, multiplier 18, plus Rs. 44,000/- consortium and Rs. 16,500/- each for estate and funeral), and that the award showed no perversity, illegality or material irregularity, the Court dismissed the appeal.

A

1

2026:CGHC:15405

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

HIFZURRAHMAN ANSARI

Digitally signed by HIFZURRAHMAN ANSARI Date: 2026.04.10 16:58:15 +0530

MAC No. 842 of 2023

1 - Pramod Das S/o Ganesh Das Manikpuri Aged About 32 Years R/o Ranwabhatha House Of Kishan Pal, Police Station Khamtarai, Tahsil And District Raipur (C.G.) (Driver Of Alleged Offending Vehicle Truck Bearing Registration No. C.G. 04 Ja 6017)

2 - Smt. Saroj Tiwari W/o R.K. Tiwari Aged About 60 Years R/o Ansho Ratan, Shanker Nagar, Raipur, Police Station Civil Line, District Raipur (C.G.) (Owner Of Alleged Offending Vehicle Truck Bearing Registration No. Cg 04 Ja 6017)

... Appellants

versus

1 - Asheshwar Yadav S/o Jagarnath Yadav Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Motipur, Post Office Thakraha, District Pashchimi Champaran, Tahsil Madhubani (Bihar)

2 - Geeta Devi W/o Asheshar Yadav Aged About 39 Years R/o Village Motipur, Post Office Thakraha, District Pashchimi Champaran, Tahsil Madhubani (Bihar)

... Respondent(s)

For Appellants : Mr. S. P. Sahu, Advocate

For Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Thakur, Advocate

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput,

Order on Board

02.04.2026

1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “MV Act”) has been preferred by the appellants/claimants, being aggrieved by the award dated 12.12.2022 passed by the learned 12^th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for short learned Tribunal), Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) in MACT case No. 736/2019.

2

1. By the impugned award, the learned Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs. 12,56,360/- to the appellants/claimants for the death of the deceased/Neeraj Kumar in an accident that occurred on 11.07.2022 due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle (Truck) bearing Registration No. CG-04-JA-6017 driven by Respondent No. 1 and owned by Respondent No. 2.

1. As per the pleadings in the claim petition filed under Section 166 of the MV Act, the deceased was riding a motorcycle which was dashed against by the offending vehicle, resulting into his death. The deceased was aged about 19 years and was employed in a factory, earning Rs. 12,000/- per month. Thus, the compensation of Rs. 22,30,000/- was claimed.

1. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2/driver and owner filed their written statements denying the averments made in the claim application and stated that amount claimed by the appellants/claimants is exaggerated. Hence, it is prayed that they may be exonerated from the liability to pay the compensation.

1. On the basis of the aforesaid pleadings, the learned Tribunal framed 3 issues and, after appreciating the material available on record, decided the same in favour of the appellants/claimants and awarded the aforesaid compensation.

1. Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants submits that the compensation awarded by the learned tribunal is on the lower side. Hence, it is prayed that suitable enhancement be made by this Court.

1. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No. 1 & 2 supports the impugned award and submits that just and reasonable compensation has been awarded by the learned Tribunal.

1. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

3

1. From the record, it does not appear that the appellants/claimants were able to satisfactorily establish the profession and income of the deceased. The learned Tribunal, upon a careful appreciation of the evidence available on record, assessed the monthly income of the deceased at Rs. 7,800/-. The Tribunal further added 40% towards future prospects and, after deducting one-half towards personal expenses and applying the multiplier of 18, computed the loss of dependency. Additionally, for loss of consortium Rs. 44,000/-, loss of estate Rs. 16,500/- and funeral expenses Rs. 16,500/- were duly awarded by the learned Tribunal. Consequently, the total compensation of Rs. 12,56,360/was granted in favour of the appellants/claimants.

1. In the considered opinion of this Court, the learned Tribunal has appropriately assessed the income of the deceased in the absence of cogent evidence and the award does not suffer from any perversity, illegality, or material irregularity warranting interference by this Court.

1. Accordingly, the appeal being devoid of merit stands dismissed .

(Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge

H.Ansari

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal is inadequate (on the lower side) and requires enhancement by this Court.medium confidence¶26
The court held
The learned Tribunal appropriately assessed the income of the deceased in the absence of cogent evidence, and the award does not suffer from any perversity, illegality or material irregularity warranting interference by this Court.ratio¶31

Statutes considered

2 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988173¶20 166¶23

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Award dated 12.12.2022 granting compensation of Rs. 12,56,360/- to the claimants in MACT case No. 736/2019¶20
learned 12th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) · 12.12.2022
Prior proceeding
Claim petition filed under Section 166 of the MV Act after the deceased Neeraj Kumar, aged about 19, employed in a factory earning Rs. 12,000/- per month, died when his motorcycle was hit by the offending vehicle; compensation of Rs. 22,30,000/- was claimed¶23
Prior proceeding
Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 filed written statements denying the averments and prayed for exoneration from liability¶24
Prior proceeding
Tribunal framed 3 issues, decided them in favour of the claimants and awarded compensation of Rs. 12,56,360/-¶25

Parties & counsel

AI extract

appellant
Pramod Das¶8
S. P. Sahu
appellant
Smt. Saroj Tiwari¶9
S. P. Sahu
respondent
Asheshwar Yadav¶12
Rakesh Kumar Thakur
respondent
Geeta Devi¶13
Rakesh Kumar Thakur

Coram

AI extract

Sachin Singh Rajputauthor¶17

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Chhattisgarh HC
Decided on: 1 Apr 2026 · April
Registered: 8 Jun 2023
Case no.: MAC/842/2023
CNR: CGHC010176022023
Topic: Motor Accident Claims
Bench: Sachin Singh Rajput
Disposal: DISMISSED
Case type: MAC

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Sachin Singh Rajput

Krishna Sahu Vs Smt. Kaushilya
31 Mar 2026
Shriram General Insurance Company Limited Vs Lalit Kumar Sinha
31 Mar 2026
Shriram General Insurance Company Limited Vs Smt. Bharti Chaturvedi
31 Mar 2026
Smt. Anita Yadav Vs Smt Kavita Das
1 Apr 2026
Shriram General Insurance Company Limited Vs Bhoj Kumar
1 Apr 2026
Smt. Barkha Jha Vs Ram Prakash Sinha
1 Apr 2026

Cite this judgement

Pramod Das v. Asheshwar Yadav, MAC/842/2023 (CG), decided on 1 April 2026.

The High Court of Chhattisgarh publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes2

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988173 · 166

View all statutes

Procedural history4

Award dated 12.12.2022 granting compensation of Rs. 12,56,360/- to the claimants in MACT case No. 736/2019learned 12th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) · 12.12.2022
Claim petition filed under Section 166 of the MV Act after the deceased Neeraj Kumar, aged about 19, employed in a factory earning Rs. 12,000/- per month, died when his motorcycle was hit by the offending vehicle; compensation of Rs. 22,30,000/- was claimed
Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 filed written statements denying the averments and prayed for exoneration from liability

View full history

Bench / Coram

Sachin Singh Rajput

Parties & counsel