[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Chattisgarh High Court

Smt. Shipra Babbar vs Kunjlal Dadsena on 2 April, 2026

                                                                 1




                                                                                                 NAFR

          Digitally
          signed by
          PRAKASH
                                  HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
PRAKASH   KUMAR
KUMAR     Date:
          2026.04.02
          11:49:37
          +0530

                                                  MAC No. 1384 of 2016

                                            Judgment Reserved on : 25/03/2026
                                          Judgment Pronounced on : 02/04/2026
                       Smt. Shipra Babbar W/o Sanjay Babbar, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Plot
                       No.07, B, Ashish Nagar, Rishali, Bhilai, Police Station Sector 06, Bhilai
                       Nagar, Presetnly R/o M I G-167, Hudco, Bhilai, Police Station Sector-
                       06,       Bhilai       Nagar,        Tahsil         and      District      Durg,
                       Chhattisgarh .................Claimant,
                                                                                           --- Appellant
                                                            versus
                       1 - Kunjlal Dadsena S/o Tiharan Lal Dadsena, Aged About 28 Years R/o
                       Dumarpali, Police Station Basna, Tahsil and District Mahasamund,
                       Chhattisgarh ................Driver of offending Vehicle Bearing No. C.G.-06-
                       D-9586,
                       2 - Sheikh Hamid S/o Sheikh Mohar, Aged About 27 Years R/o Basna,
                       Police     Station     Basna,      Tahsil     and     District     Mahasamund,
                       Chhattisgarh ................Owner of Offending Vehicle Bearing No. C.G.-
                       06-D-9586,
                       3 - Shriram General Insurance Company Limited, Registered and Head
                       Office E-8, Ricco Industrial Area, Sitapura, Jaipur Rajasthan 303022,
                       Through Branch Manager Branch Office, Ama Naka, Mahoba Bazar,
                       Raipur, Chhattisgarh ................Insurer of Offending Vehicle Bearing No.
                       C.G.-06-D-9586,
                                                                                        --- Respondents

AND

Shailesh Bhatiya S/o M.L.Bhatiya, Aged About 40 Years R/o M I G-167, Hudco, Bhilai, Police Station Sector-06, Bhilai Nagar, Tahsil and District Durg, Chhattisgarh ................Claimant,

---Appellant Versus 1 - Kunjlal Dadsena S/o Tiharan Lal Dadsena, Aged About 28 Years Registered And Head Office E-8, Ricco Industrial Area, Sitapura, Jaipur Rajasthan 303022, Through Branch Manager Branch Office, Ama Naka, Mahoba Bazar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh ................Driver of Offending Vehicle Bearing No. C.G.-06-D-9586, 2 - Sheikh Hamid S/o Sheikh Mohar, Aged About 27 Years R/o Basna, Police Station Basna, Tahsil And District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh ................Owner of Offending Vehicle Bearing No. C.G.- 06-D-9586, 3 - Shriram General Insurance Company Limited, Registered And Head Office E-8, Ricco Industrial Area, Sitapura, Jaipur Rajasthan 303022, Through Branch Manager Branch Office, Ama Naka, Mahoba Bazar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh ................Insurer of offending Vehicle Bearing No. C.G.-06-D-9586,

--- Respondents

For Appellants : Mr. Aditya Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondent No.1 & 2 : None For Respondent No.3 : Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, along with Ms. Swati Agrawal, Advocate

(Hon'ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal) CAV Judgment

1. Since both the above appeals filed by the claimants arise out of

same accident that took place on 03.06.2013, they are being

heard together and disposed of by this common judgment.

2. These appeals are filed by the claimants against the award dated

30.03.2016 passed by the learned 6th Additional Motor Accident

Claims Tribunal, District - Durg, C.G. (hereinafter referred to as

"the Claims Tribunal") in Claim Case No.20/2014 (in case of

Appellant Smt. Shipra Babbar) awarding total compensation of

Rs.1,54,336/- and in Claim Case No.22/2014 (in case of

Appellant Shailesh Bhatia) awarding total compensation of

Rs.1,11,381/- with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of

application till its realization in favour of claimants while fastening

liability on Non-applicant No.1 and 2 (owner and driver) to pay the

compensation and exonerating Non-applicant No.3 (insurance

company).

3. As per the averments made in the claim petitions, on 03.06.2013

the claimants/injured were going on a car from Bhilai to Durgapur,

(Raurkela) and when they reached near Jampali (Pithoura), at

that time, the driver (Non-Applicant No.1) of a truck bearing

registration No.CG-06-D-9586 (hereinafter referred to as ' the

offending vehicle') by driving the same in a rash and negligent

manner, dashed the car of the claimants, as a result of which,

claimant - Smt. Shipra Babbar sustained grievous injuries over

her both the legs and claimant - Shailesh Bhatia sustained

grievous injuries over his thigh of right leg. Thereafter, claimants

were taken to the Hospital for treatment. At the time of accident,

the said offending vehicle was owned by Non-Applicant No.2 and

was insured with Non-applicant No.3.

4. On account of injuries sustained by the claimants, claim petition

under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act was filed by him

seeking compensation to the tune of Rs.43,34,000/- (in MAC

No.1384/2016) and Rs.20,13,000/- (in MAC No.1383/2016) under

various heads, inter alia, stating that at the time of accident,

Appellant - Smt. Shipra Babbar was aged about 38 years and

was earning Rs.15,000/- per month by working as Assistant

Professor, Kalyan College, Bhilai, whereas, Appellant - Shailesh

Bhatia was aged about 40 years, earning Rs.7,500/- per month

by working in Bhatia Furniture Shop. The learned Tribunal, after

considering the evidence led by the parties, passed an award as

mentioned in paragraph 2 of this judgment. Hence, these appeals

have been filed by the claimants for enhancement of

compensation on various heads.

5. Learned counsel for the claimants/injured submits that in both the

appeals, the claimants have suffered grievous injuries. Claimant

Smt. Shipra Babbar has suffered fractures on her both legs, i.e. in

femur bone of right leg and tibia fibula bone fracture in left leg,

and she was admitted in hospital for six days from 03.06.2013 to

08.06.2013 and for three months she was not able to perform her

duties, whereas, claimant Shailesh Bhatia has suffered femur

bone fracture on his right leg and he was admitted in hospital for

11 days from 03.06.2013 to 13.06.2013. He further submits that

the amount awarded by the learned Tribunal to the claimants

towards transportation expenses, special diet, attendant and pain

and suffering is on lower side and the same needs to be

enhanced suitably. This apart, the amount awarded to the

claimant Shailesh Bhatia for his loss of income for 3 months is

also on lower side and the same needs to be enhanced.

6. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company/Non-Applicant No.3

while admitting that no separate appeal has been filed by them

against the impugned award, submits that on the date of accident

though the offending vehicle was insured with the insurance

company but the same was being plied on the road on

contravention with the terms and conditions of the insurance

policy. He further submits that on the date of accident, the

driver/owner of the offending vehicle did not possess valid fitness

certificate. Therefore, the Tribunal was justified in exonerating the

insurance company from liability to pay the compensation and

fastening the liability upon the owner and driver of the offending

vehicle. As such, the findings recorded by the Tribunal is just and

proper and warrants no interference by this Court. He further

submits that owner and driver of the offending vehicle are

capable to pay the compensation, and further submitted that

order of pay and recover is not applicable in every claim case.

7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

8. It is not in dispute that the both the claimants suffered grievous

injuries over their body due to vehicular accident caused by driver

of the offending vehicle which was being driven in a rash and

negligent manner. Furthermore, on the date of accident, the

offending vehicle was insured with the Non-applicant

No.3/Insurance Company (Respondent No.3 herein in both

appeals) which was valid from 30.05.2013 to 29.05.2014 as per

insurance policy (Ex.D-1). In this regard, Ramesh Sinha (NAW-1),

Law Assistant has been examined by the Insurance Company

who has stated that though the offending vehicle was insured at

the time of accident, but on the date of accident i.e. 03.06.2013,

the offending vehicle was not having any fitness certificate

(wrongly mentioned as not having "valid permit" in place of

"fitness certificate" in the findings of the Tribunal).

9. Thus, from the aforementioned evidence, it is quite vivid that

there has been a breach of the policy conditions at the time of the

accident. Therefore, in that view of the matter, this Court is of the

view that the owner and driver of the offending vehicle are liable

to pay compensation to the claimants, and the learned Claims

Tribunal was justified in exonerating the Non-Applicant

No.3/insurance company from its liability on the ground that on

the date of the accident, the offending vehicle did not have a valid

fitness certificate.

Enhancement of Compensation in MAC No.1384/2016

10. So far as the enhancement of the amount of compensation is

concerned, the claimant in MAC No. 1384/2016, Smt. Shipra

Babbar, sustained fractures in both legs, namely, a fracture of the

femur bone in the right leg and fractures of the tibia and fibula

bones in the left leg. The said injuries are duly substantiated by

medical bills and prescriptions exhibited as Ex. P-11, P-12, P-31

to P-43, and P-48. Accordingly, the total medical expenditure

amounting to Rs. 38,256/-, as assessed by the learned Tribunal,

is hereby affirmed. Further, considering the nature and severity of

the injuries, it is reasonable to conclude that the claimant would

have required a minimum period of three months for recovery.

Thus, the loss of income for the said period, as assessed by the

Tribunal at Rs. 60,180/-, is also affirmed. Moreover, the amount

awarded towards loss of amenities and future treatment, i.e., Rs.

50,000/-, being just and reasonable, is likewise affirmed.

11. As regards the amount awarded by the Tribunal towards pain &

suffering, a perusal of the record would reveal that indisputably

due to rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle by

driver/non-applicant No.1, claimant sustained grievous injuries

over her both legs, further, she was admitted in hospital from

03.06.2013 to 08.06.2013, as is evident from discharge summary

(Ex.P-30). During hospitalization and treatment, appellant must

have suffered pain and suffering. However, the Tribunal, on its

own, assessed and granted Rs.1,000/- towards pain and

suffering, which in the considered opinion of this Court, is not just

and proper. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of

the case, the nature and extent of injuries suffered by the

claimant, ends of justice would be served, if the claimant is

granted an amount of Rs.50,000/- towards pain and suffering in

place of Rs.1,000/- as awarded by the Tribunal. Accordingly, the

appellant is awarded Rs.50,000/- towards pain and suffering.

12. From perusal of the record, it also appears that the learned

Tribunal has awarded meager amount under the heads of

Transportation Expenses, Special Diet, Attendant Charges, which

needs to be suitably enhanced. Taking into account the nature

and extent of injuries sustained by the claimant in the said

accident, I am inclined to grant a sum of Rs.4,000/- in place of

Rs.2,000/- for transportation expenses, Rs.6,000/- in place of

Rs.2,000/- towards special diet and Rs.6,000/- in place of

Rs.900/- towards attendant. Ordered accordingly.

13. In this way, the claimant - Smt. Shipra Babbar is entitled for

compensation in the following manner:-

  S.               Heads             Awarded by this Court
  No.
  1.    Medical   Expenses       (as Rs.38,256/-
        assessed by the Tribunal)
  2.    Transportation Expenses      Rs.4,000/-
  3.    Special Diet                 Rs.6,000/-
  4.    Attendant Charge             Rs.6,000
  5.    Loss of income of the Rs.60,180/-
        claimant/ injured for 3
        months Rs.20,060 x 3 (as
        awarded by the Tribunal)
  6.    Pain & Suffering             Rs.50,000/-
  7.    Loss of Amenities & future Rs.50,000/-
        treatment (as assessed by
        the Tribunal)
              Total Compensation     Rs.2,14,436/-

14. Since the Tribunal has already awarded Rs.1,54,336/-, after

deducting the same from Rs.2,14,436/-, the claimant/injured -

Smt. Shipra Babbar is entitled for an additional compensation of

Rs.60,100/-, which shall carry interest as awarded by the

Tribunal. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall

remain intact.

Enhancement of Compensation in MAC No.1383/2016

15. So far as the enhancement of the amount of compensation is

concerned, the claimant, Shailesh Bhatia in MAC No. 1383/2016,

sustained a fracture in the femur bone of his right leg, which is

evident from the medical bills and prescriptions duly exhibited as

Ex. P-12, P-39, and P-45 to P-68. Accordingly, the total medical

expenditure amounting to Rs. 41,231/, as assessed by the

Tribunal, is hereby affirmed. Further, considering the nature of the

injuries, it is reasonable to conclude that the claimant would have

required at least three months for recovery. The loss of income for

the said period has been assessed at Rs. 13,500/- by the

Tribunal; however, in the considered opinion of this Court, the

same is on the lower side. Therefore, having regard to the

minimum wages applicable at the relevant point of time, a sum of

Rs. 15,000/- (Rs. 5,000 x 3) is awarded towards loss of income

for three months. Moreover, the amount awarded towards loss of

amenities and future treatment, i.e., Rs. 50,000/-, is hereby

affirmed.

16. As regards the amount awarded by the Tribunal towards pain &

suffering, a perusal of the record would reveal that indisputably

due to rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle by

driver/non-applicant No.1, claimant sustained grievous injuries

over his right leg, further, he was admitted in hospital from

03.06.2013 to 13.06.2013, as is evident from discharge summary

(Ex.P-38). During hospitalization and treatment,

appellant/claimant must have suffered pain and suffering.

However, the Tribunal, on its own, assessed and granted

Rs.1,000/- towards pain and suffering, which in the considered

opinion of this Court, is not just and proper. Therefore,

considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature

and extent of injuries suffered by the claimant, ends of justice

would be served, if the claimant is granted an amount of

Rs.40,000/- towards pain and suffering in place of Rs.1,000/- as

awarded by the Tribunal. Accordingly, the appellant is awarded

Rs.40,000/- towards pain and suffering.

17. From perusal of the record, it also appears that the learned

Tribunal has awarded meager amount under the heads of

Transportation Expenses, Special Diet, Attendant Charges, which

needs to be suitably enhanced. Taking into account the nature

and extent of injuries sustained by the claimant in the said

accident, I am inclined to grant a sum of Rs.6,000/- in place of

Rs.2,000/- for transportation expenses, Rs.6,000/- in place of

Rs.2,000/- towards special diet and Rs.6,000/- in place of

Rs.1,650/- towards attendant. Ordered accordingly.

18. In this way, the claimant - Shailesh Bhatia is entitled for

compensation in the following manner:-

       S. No.                  Heads          Awarded by this
                                              Court
       1.          Medical   Expenses      (as Rs.41,231/-
                   assessed by the Tribunal)
       2.          Transportation Expenses    Rs.6,000/-
       3.          Special Diet               Rs.6,000/-
       4.          Attendant                  Rs.6,000
       5.          Loss of income of the Rs.15,000/-
                   claimant/ injured for 3
                   months Rs.5,000 x 3
       6.          Pain & Suffering           Rs.40,000/-
       7.          Loss of Amenities & future Rs.50,000/-
                   treatment (as assessed by
                   the Tribunal)
                        Total Compensation Rs.1,64,231/-

19. Since the Tribunal has already awarded Rs.1,11,381/-, after

deducting the same from Rs.1,64,231/-, the claimant/injured -

Shailesh Bhatia is entitled for an additional compensation of

Rs.52,850/-, which shall carry interest as awarded by the

Tribunal. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall

remain intact.

20. With regard to the payment of compensation, considering the

facts and circumstances of the case, and further considering the

fact that at the time of accident, the offending vehicle was insured

with the Non-Applicant No.3/insurance company (Respondent

No.3) and also taking support of judgment passed by Hon'ble

Supreme Court in case of Amrit Paul Singh and another v. Tata