1

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH BILASPUR

M. A. (C) No. 1077 of 2015

1.

Harkunwar Nirmalkar Wd/o R. C. Nirmalkar, Aged About 54

Years,

2.

Ku. Rekha Nirmalkar D/o R. C. Nirmalkar, Aged About 20

Years, both are R/o Village Pendarwa, Ranigaon, P. S. and

Tehsil - Ratanpur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

---- Appellants

Versus

1.

Sushila Nirmalkar (correct title is Dewangan), Wd/o Shyamlal

Nirmalkar, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Ward No. 7, Deendayal

Nagar, Deepka, presently residing at Deengapur Basti,

Rampur, Tehsil and District Korba, Chhattisgarh,

2.

Mahavir @ Baburam Gond S/o Amaan Singh Gond, R/o

Litiyakhar, Tehsil Pali, District Korba, Chhattisgarh,

3.

Madhu Agrawal W/o Suresh Agrawal, R/o Laxmi Niwas,

Vinoba Nagar, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh,

4.

Divisional Manager, The New India Insurance Company Ltd.,

Rama Trade Centre, IInd Floor, UT Earth Building, Opp- Rajiv

Plaza, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondents

For Appellants

:

Shri Pallav Mishra, Advocate

For Respondent No.1

:

Shri Alok Rishi, Advocate

For Respondent No.2

:

None

For Respondent No.3

:

Shri J.A. Lohani, Advocate

For Respondent No.4

:

Shri Dashrath Gupta, Advocate

(Proceedings through Video Conferencing)

Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge

Judgment

o

n Board

19.07.2021

1.

Challenge in this appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor

Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'M.V. Act') is to

the impugned award dated 09.02.2015 passed by the

Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (F.T.C.) Korba,

Chhattisgarh (hereinafter referred to as 'Claims Tribunal') in

Claim Case No.152 of 2013 whereby learned Claims Tribunal

allowed the application filed under Section 166 of the M.V. Act

2

in part and awarded Rs.7,09,000/- as total compensation in a

fatal accident case.

2.

Brief facts relevant for disposal of this appeal, are that, on

16.05.2012, Shyamlal Nirmalkar was sleeping in the campus.

On the fateful day, at about 3.15 hours, one Hyva Truck

bearing No.CG/10/C/5667 (hereinafter referred to as 'offending

vehicle') driven by non-applicant No.1 rashly and negligently,

ran over Shyamlal Nirmalkar and Santram. In the said

accident, Shyamlal Nirmalkar suffered injuries over his person

and succumbed to those injuries.

3.

Respondent No.1/applicant filed an application under Section

166 of the M.V. Act claiming herself to be wife of Late Shyamlal

Nirmalkar. Appellant No.1 was impleaded as non-applicant

No.4 (mother of deceased) and appellant No.2 (sister of

deceased) has been impleaded as non-applicant No.5 by way

of amendment. In claim application, it was pleaded that

claimant is wife of deceased, on the date of accident,

deceased was aged about 27 years, working as Office

Assistant, earning Rs.10,000/- per month from Budhia

Enterprises and claimed total compensation of Rs.80,60,000/-.

4.

Non-applicants No.1 and 2/driver and owner of offending

vehicle submitted reply to claim application and denied the

entire pleadings made in claim application. It was pleaded that

truck owned by non-applicant No.2 was insured with non-

3

applicant No.3, as such, liability, if any, to pay the amount of

compensation would be upon non-applicant No.3.

5.

Non-applicant No.3/Insurance Company also submitted reply

to claim application, while denying the factual pleadings made

in claim application, pleaded that accident was not as a result

of negligence on the part of non-applicant No.1; non-applicant

No.1 was not possessed with valid and effective driving

licence; on the date of accident, offending vehicle was plied in

breach of policy conditions as there was no valid fitness

certificate with offending vehicle. It was further pleaded that

applicant has not arrayed all the legal representatives of

deceased as party non-applicants in claim application.

6.

Non-applicant No.4/appellant No.