2026:CGHC:11150 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP227 No. 261 of 2026 Smt. Seema Sahu, Wd/o Late Gyanendra Kumar @ Gyanesh Kumar Sahu, aged about 35 years, R/o Village - Donar, Post - Jhiria, Tehsil and District - Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. (Claimant)

... Petitioner versus

1 - Rajesh Kumar Sahu, S/o Shri Hazarilal Sahu, aged about 36 years, R/o - Ward No. 8, Chandrashekhar Azad Ward, Nagari, Thana And Tehsil - Nagari, District -

Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. (Owner/driver)

2 - Manager Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited, Shiv Mohan Bhawan, Vidhansabha Road, Pandari Raipur Tahsil And Dist - Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

... Respondents For Petitioner : Shri R.S. Patel, Advocate For Respondents : None.

Hon’ble Justice Shri Sachin Singh Rajput

Order on Board

09/03/2026 This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is against the order dated 05.01.2026 passed by learned Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for short the “Tribunal”) FTC Dhamtari, CG in Claim Execution No. 02/2025 granting 50% of the awarded sum to the petitioner/claimant instead of 100%.

2. Facts in short: On 06.02.2022 one Gyanendra Kumar alias Gyanesh Kumar Sahu met with a road accident by a speeding motorcycle ridden rashly and negligently by respondent No.1 which resulted in his on- the-spot death. The petitioner herein who happens to be the widow of the deceased filed a claim case seeking compensation of Rs. 1,90,00,000/-, however, learned Tribunal by award dated 07.08.2024 awarded a sum of Rs. 99,92,744/- with 7% per annum interest directing the insurer to adopt the “first pay and then recover” mechanism. Subsequently, on 03.01.2025 the petitioner filed an application under Order XXI Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short “CPC”) seeking execution of the award dated 07.08.2024. After that application being filed, the insurance company made a request for maintenance of status quo citing their intention of filing the appeal in the High Court against the award granting compensation in favour of the petitioner herein.

3. Learned Tribunal however by order impugned dated 05.01.2026 directed payment of 50% of the awarded sum on the terms and conditions enumerated in the award itself. It is this order which is under challenge in this petition.

4. Heard counsel for the petitioner and perused the documents on record including the order impugned.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a widow aged about 36 years who was totally dependent on the deceased for livelihood, and therefore payment of only 50% of the award amount would not eliminate her miseries. Being this, he submits that the other 50% of the award amount may also be directed to be paid to her.

6. Having heard counsel for the petitioner and gone through the documents on record, this Court does not see any illegality or irregularity in the order impugned directing payment of 50% in favour of the petitioner on the ground that if full award amount is disbursed to her, entire purpose of appeal being filed by the insurer would be defeated. The order impugned therefore appears to be fully justified and warrants no interference in this petition particularly while exercising the supervisory jurisdiction under Article

227 of the constitution of India.

7. In this view of the matter, the petitioner being without any substance is liable to be dismissed. It is dismissed as such.

Sd/-

(Sachin Singh Rajput )

Judge J/Ashish Digitally signed by ASHISH ASHISHTIWARI TIWARI D 20 a 2 te 6 : .04.17 +0530