[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Sanjeev Kumar @ Balam Banjara vs Jaan Bai on 27 February, 2026
1
2026:CGHC:10215
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MAC No. 927 of 2022
1. Sanjeev Kumar @ Balam Banjara S/o Rajesh Banjara Aged About
26 Years Caste- Satnami, R/o Village Piparkhunti, Police Station
Pandatarai, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh.
2. Rajesh Banjara S/o Khelan Banjara Aged About 54 Years Caste-
Satnami, R/o Village Piparkhunti, Police Station Pandatarai,
District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh.
... Appellant(s)
versus
1. Jaan Bai Wd/o Late Mastram Tandon Aged About 55 Years Caste-
Satnami, R/o Village Kumhi, Police Station Pandatarai, District
Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh.
2. Phoolchand S/o Late Mastram Aged About 43 Years Caste-
Satnami, R/o Village Kumhi, Police Station Pandatarai, District
Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh.
3. Rameshwar S/o Late Mastram Aged About 32 Years Caste-
Satnami, R/o Village Kumhi, Police Station Pandatarai, District
Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh.
4. Maharani D/o Late Mastram Aged About 40 Years Caste-
Satnami, R/o Bijrakapa Khurd, Police Station And Tahsil Lalpur,
District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh.
... Respondent(s)
For Appellants : Ms. Sakshi Chhabda, Adv. on behalf of
Mr. Malay Shrivastava, Adv.
For Respondents : Mr. Rajendra Patel, Adv. on behalf of
Mr. Sunil Sahu, Adv.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey
Judgment On Board
27.2.2026
1) By way of this appeal, driver and owner of the offending vehicle
have challenged the award passed by the learned Additional
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kabirdham in Claim Case No.
11/2021 dated 26.7.2022 whereby learned Tribunal has passed
an award to the tune of Rs. 6,92,337/- on account of injuries
sustained by Mastram.
2) Facts of the present case are that on 9.3.2018, at about 8:00 pm
Ranjan Singh, Daroga Patre and Mastram were going to Village
Kumhari on motorcycle. When they reached near Nawagaon
Hattha, the offending vehicle - Tractor bearing registration No.
CG-04-DT-3873 being driven in rash and negligent manner
dashed the motorcycle. In the accident, Mastram sustained
grievous injuries over various parts of body. Mastam was initially
taken to Community Health Centre, Pandariya and was referred to
Life Care Hospital, Bilaspur where he remained hospitalized from
10.3.2018 till 15.3.2018 ; thereafter, he was admitted to S.K.B.
Multi Speciality Hospital, Bilaspur where he remained hospitalized
from 20.3.2018 till 7.4.2018. Subsequently, Mastram died on
5.12.2019 at his home.
3) Claimants, who are widow and children of the deceased filed the
claim case claiming therein compensation to the tune of Rs.
12,09,342/- and pleaded that deceased was laborer and he was
earning Rs. 2,500/- per month. Offending vehicle was not insured.
Driver and owner filed reply and denied the contents of claim
application. Learned Tribunal framed issues treating the claim
petition as injury case ; parties led evidence and thereafter, award
was passed.
4) Learned counsel appearing for the driver and owner of offending
vehicle submits that Mastram passed away on 5.12.2019, nearly
21 months after the accident on 9.3.2018, due to this extended
duration, his death cannot be directly tied to the accident. She
further submits that claimants have exaggerated the expenses
incurred in medical treatment and learned Tribunal has awarded
compensation at higher side. She prays to set aside the award
impugned.
5) On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the claimants
submits that learned Tribunal has treated the claim petition to be
an injury case and granted compensation towards medical
expenses, pain and suffering, transportation and special diet. He
further submits that learned Tribunal has awarded just and proper
compensation and there is no scope for interference.
6) Heard.
7) It is not in dispute that offending vehicle was not insured, therefore
learned Tribunal fastened liability of driver and owner. A careful
perusal of the record would show that Mastram sustained serious
injuries including multiple fractures and he remained hospitalized
for considerable period at various hospitals. Claimants produced
medical bills and learned Tribunal honored the same whereas
appellants herein failed to lead documentary evidence to prove
the contrary.
8) Learned Tribunal has passed following award :-
Sr. Heads Compensation awarded
by Tribunal
1. Medical Bills Rs. 5,92,837/-
2. Loss of Earning Rs. 12,500/-
(four months) (@ Rs 2,500/- pm)
3. Attendant Charges Rs. 12,500/-
4. Transportation Rs. 5,000/-
5. Special Diet Rs. 20,000/-
6. Pain and Suffering Rs. 50,000/-
TOTAL Rs. 6,92,337/-
9) A careful perusal of award would reveal that learned Tribunal has
awarded Rs. 12,500/- towards loss of earning ; Rs. 50,000/-
towards pain and suffering ; Rs. 20,000/- towards special diet ;
Rs. 5,000/- towards transportation and Rs. 12,500/- towards
attendant charges. Learned Tribunal also honored the medical
bills submitted by appellant. Thus, in total Rs. 6,92,337/- has been
awarded by the Tribunal. In my opinion, learned Tribunal has
awarded appropriate compensation under these heads.
10) In view of the discussion made herein-above, no case is made out
to interfere with the award impugned. Consequently, this appeal
fails and is hereby dismissed.
Sd/-
(Rakesh Mohan Pandey)
JUDGE
Ajinkya
