2025:CGHC:36626 AFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 523 of 2019

1. Budhanbai W/o Late Ghudauram Aged About 55 Years

2. Suresh Kumar S/o Late Ghudauram Aged About 29 Years Both are R/o Jamkotapara, Kondagaon, Police Station And District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh.

--- Appellants/ Applicants-Claimants versus

1. Jaishankar Nishad S/o Bisauram Nishad Aged About 38 Years R/o Patharaguda Virsavarkar, Jagdalpur, District Jagdalpur Chhattisgarh. (Driver

2. Smt. Jogeshwary Rao W/o P. Danteshwar Rao, Aged About 52 Years (Wrongly Mentioned In Impugned Order As 523) R/o House No. 182, Bansmunda Road, Patharagudapara, Jagdalpur, District Jagdalpur Chhattisgarh. (Owner

3. Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Hotel Laxman Avenue, Medical College Road Jagdalpur District Baster, Chhattisgarh. (Insurance Company ---Respondents/ Non-applicants ____________________________________________________________

For Appellants : Mr. Shobhit Koshta, Advocate For Respondent No. 3 : Mr. Raj Awasthi, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Judgment On Board

28/07/2025

1. Appellants-claimants have filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “Act of 1988”), challenging the award dated 11.10.2018 passed by Learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kondagaon, PAWAN Chhattisgarh (for short “Claims Tribunal”) in Claim Case No. 42/2018, KUMAR JHA

Digitally

signed by whereby learned Claims Tribunal allowed the application filed under Section

PAWAN

KUMAR JHA

166 of the Act, 1988 in part and awarded total sum of ₹ 14,68,344/- as compensation in motor accidental death case.

2. Motor accident occurred on 12.03.2018 at about 08:00 p.m. near Juganipul, National Highway-30 by the negligent parking of truck bearing number CG04 J 1421 (hereinafter referred to as “offending truck”) without any precautionary measures by its driver non-applicant No. 1 and death of Lokesh Kumar (deceased) is not in dispute. Appellants-claimants have filed this appeal seeking enhancement of amount of compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal.

3. For the foregoing discussion, this Court is not dealing with the facts of accident as pleaded by the parties in their claim application, reply to the claim application and further adverted in the impugned award but only considering the ground raised by the appellants-claimants seeking enhancement of compensation.

4. Learned counsel for appellants-claimants would submit that the Claims Tribunal erred in recording a finding that the deceased was also contributory negligent to the extent of 50% overlooking the fact that the offending truck was parked on the road without there being any sign or indication nor indicators lights were on. The accident occurred in night at about 08:00 pm and therefore accident would be a result of composite negligence on the part of driver of offending truck as also the owner. He also contended that the Claims Tribunal erred in not awarding amount of compensation under the head of loss of consortium to mother of deceased (claimant No. 1).

5. Learned counsel for Respondent No. 3-Insurance Company opposes the submission of learned counsel for appellants-claimants and would submit that the amount of compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal in the facts of the case is just and proper and it does not call for any interference.

6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the record of claim case.

7. So far as the submission made by learned counsel for appellants-claimants that the claims Tribunal erred in recording a finding that deceased was also held contributory negligent to the extent of 50% erroneously, perusal of record would show that the claimants who are mother and brother of deceased in the pleading of the claim application have pleaded that the deceased was returning from his place of work ie., Bank of India, Branch- Badedongar, Kondagaon. At NH-30 he met with an accident with the stationary truck parked on the road without there being any sign or indication or puttin