SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 17651

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
PAVITRA MAJUMDAR – Appellant
Versus
TOMAN SAHU – Respondent
MAC/1545/2023



##PAGE1##

1

Digitally signed by GOPAL SINGH Date:

2026.05.26

18:32:42 +0530

2026:CGHC:17683

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

MAC No. 1545 of 2023

1 - Pavitra Majumdar W/o Late Bapi Majumdar Aged About 33 Years R/o - P.Vh. 119 Vishrampur, Pakhanjur, Tahsil - Pakhanjur, District - North Baster - Kanker (C.G.),...(Appellants/claimants) 2 - Viplav Majumdar S/o Late Bapi Majumdar Aged About 24 Years R/o - P.Vh. 119 Vishrampur, Pakhanjur, Tahsil - Pakhanjur, District - North Baster - Kanker (C.G.) 3 - Pallav Majumdar S/o Late Bapi Majumdar Aged About 22 Years R/o - P.Vh. 119 Vishrampur, Pakhanjur, Tahsil - Pakhanjur, District - North Baster - Kanker (C.G.) 4 - Minor Ku. Mithi Majumdar D/o Late Bapi Majumdar Aged About 2 Years 6 Month, Minor Through Legal Guardian Mother Pavitra Majumdar Appellant No. 1, R/o - P.Vh. 119 Vishrampur, Pakhanjur,

Tahsil - Pakhanjur, District - North Baster - Kanker (C.G.)

... Appellants

versus

1 - Toman Sahu S/o Hemchand Sahu Aged About 28 Years R/o Ward No. 02 Mangata Thana - Somni, Distt. Rajnandgaon (C.G.), (Driver Of The Offending Vehicle Truck No. C.G. 07/c.A./9448),...(Driver)

##PAGE2##

2

2 - M/s Ramani Ice Cream Company Limited Address - Plot No.10, Zone-C, Industrial Growth Center, Borai Durg, District Durg (C.G.), (Owner Of The Offending Vehicle Truck No. C.G.07/c.A./9448), (Owner) 3 - The New India Insurance Company Limited M.M. Tower Aakashvani Road Jagdalpur, District - Bastar (C.G.), (Insurer Of The Offending

Vehicle Truck No. C.G. 07/c.A./9448),..(Insurer)

... Respondents

For Appellants : Ms. Shaleeni Jangde, Advocate on behalf of Shri A.L. Singroul, Advocate

For Respondent No.3 : Ms. Harneet Kaur Khanuja, Advocate on behalf of Shri Sourabh Sharma,

Advocate

Hon’ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput

Order on Board

17/04/2026

1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988

(for short ‘the MV Act’) calls in question validity, correctness and judicial propriety of the award dated 22.6.2023 passed by the Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bhanupratappur, District Uttar Bastar Kanker (Chhattisgarh) (for short ‘Claims

Tribunal’) in Case No.20 of 2022.

2. By the award impugned, learned Claims Tribunal has awarded

compensation of Rs.10,86,500 on account of death of Bapi Majumdar in an accident that occurred on 18.1.2022 by rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle truck bearing registration No.CG 07 CA 9448 driven by respondent No.1,

owned by respondent No.2 and insured with respondent No.3.

##PAGE3##

3

3. As per the pleadings of the claim application, the deceased was

aged about 48 years. He was a driver. He was earning Rs.25,000 per month. He met with the accident due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle which resulted into his death.

Total compensation of Rs.43,95,000 was claimed.

4. Respondent No.1/driver, Respondent No.2/owner and

Respondent No.3/insurance company denied the averments of the claim application. Respondent No.3/insurance company also pleaded that the driver of the offending vehicle did not have a valid and effective licence to drive the offending vehicle. The offending vehicle also did not have fitness certificate and permit at the time of accident. Hence, the insurance company is not

liable to pay any compensation.

5. On the basis of above pleadings, learned Claims Tribunal framed

issues and having decided them awarded the above stated

compensation.

6. Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants submits that the

deceased was aged about 48 years. He was a driver. He was earning Rs.25,000 per month. The entire family was dependent upon his income. Thus, this Court can safely assess the monthly income of the deceased to Rs.25,000, which the learned Claims Tribunal erred in holding to Rs.6,000 per month. Learned counsel prays that a suitable enhancement be made in the

compensation.

##PAGE4##

4

7. Learned counsel for respondent No.3/insurance company

supports the impugned award. She submits that no documentary evidence is brought on record to support the inco

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top