Skip to content
Order
  • Library
  • Features
  • About
  • Blog
  • Contact
Get started
Book a Demo

Order

At Order.law, we’re building India’s leading AI-powered legal research platform.Designed for solo lawyers, law firms, and corporate legal teams, Order helps you find relevant case law, analyze judgments, and draft with confidence faster and smarter.

Product

  • Features
  • Blog

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms

Library

  • Acts
  • Judgments
© 2025 Order. All rights reserved.
  1. Home/
  2. Library/
  3. High Court Of Chhattisgarh/
  4. 2024/
  5. January

Rajesh Nayak vs. Dhan Bhusan Toppo

Decided on 31 January 2024• Citation: MAC/705/2018• High Court of Chhattisgarh
Download PDF

Read Judgment


                                           1                                        
                                                                       NAFR         
                      HIGH COURT   OF CHHATTISGARH,   BILASPUR                      
                                      MAC No. 705 of 2018                           
             1. Rajesh Nayak S/o Manehswar Nayak, Aged About 31 Years R/o Village Lodhma,
                Tahsil Kunkuri, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh                       
             2. Smt. Bhagwati Nayak W/o Rajesh Nayak, Aged About 30 Years R/o Village
                Lodhma, Tahsil Kunkuri, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh. …………..(Claimants)
                                                                 ---- Appellants    
                                        Versus                                      
             1. Dhan Bhusan Toppo S/o Josef Toppo, R/o Village Manjhatoli, Birkera, Raidih,
                Post Raidih, District Gumla Jharkhand. ……………..(Owner)               
             2. Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd., Local Branch Officer, Beside Sunday
                Market, Nayaganj, Raigarh Chhattisgarh. 492001. …….(Insurer Of Motor Cycle
                Bearing No. Jh 01 Bq 7693)                                          
             3. Sangeeta Nayak, S/o Late Kishore Nayak, House No. 155, Village Lodham, Tahsil
                And District Jashpur Chhattisgarh                                   
             4. The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Local Branch Officer, Raigarh
                Chhattisgarh. ………….(Insurer Of Motor Cycle No. CG 14 MI 0176)       
                                                              ---- Respondents      
           For Appellant           :    Ms. Simran Kaur, Advocate on behalf of Shri 
                                        A.K.Prasad, Advocate                        
           For Respondent No.2     :    Shri Pravesh Sahu, Advocate on behalf of    
                                        Shri P.R.Patankar, Advocate                 
                           Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput                 
                                     Order On Board                                 
           31/01/2024                                                               
             1.                                                                     
                This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short
                ‘M.V.Act’) has been filed against award dated 23/01/2018 passed by the
                Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jashpur (CG) in Motor Accident Claim
                No.02/2017.                                                         
             2.                                                                     
                By the impugned award, learned Tribunal has awarded Rs.2,85,000/- in
                favour of the claimants as compensation on account of death of their
                daughter Nandini Nayak in an unfortunate accident that took place on

                                           2                                        
                02/02/2016 by rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle (Motor
                Cycle) bearing registration No.JH-01-BQ-7693 by which was owned by  
                respondent No.1/ owner and insured with respondent No.2 / insurance 
                company. The driver of the offending vehicle also died in the accident.
             3.                                                                     
                As per claim application, the deceased Nandini Nayak was aged about 08
                years and she would have definitely succeeded in her life and would have
                contributed to the livelihood of her parents/claimants. Therefore,  
                Rs.15,25,000/- was claimed. Respondent No.1 / owner remained ex-parte
                before the Tribunal. Respondent No.2/ insurer of the offending vehicle
                stated that the offending vehicle was not insured with them and the said
                vehicle was being driven in violation of the insurance policy. Respondent
                no.3 also resisted the claim application.                           
             4.                                                                     
                Learned Tribunal after framing issues, decided those issues in favour of the
                appellants / claimants and awarded compensation as stated above.    
             5.                                                                     
                Learned counsel for the appellants / claimants submits that the law with
                regard to death of a child is no longer res integra in view of the judgment of
                Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kishan Gopal and anr. v. Lala and
                ors., (2014) 1 SCC 244 and Kurvan Ansari @ Kurvan Ali and anr. v.   
                Shyam Kishore Murmu and  anr., (2022) 1 SCC 317. She submits that   
                apart from this, the amount of compensation on other heads is also on the
                lower side.                                                         
             6.                                                                     
                Learned counsel for respondent No.2 supports the award passed by the
                learned Tribunal and submits that looking to the facts and circumstances of
                the case, just compensation has been awarded.                       
             7.                                                                     
                I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival
                submissions and perused the records.                                
             8.                                                                     
                In the light of judgments passed in the case of Kurvan Ansari (supra) and
                Kishan Gopal (supra), this Court feels that ends of justice would be served
                by awarding Rs.5 lakhs to the appellants / claimants.               
             9.                                                                     
                Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed and amount of Rs.5 lakhs is
                awarded to the appellants / claimants. After deducting Rs.2,85,000/- as
                awarded by learned Tribunal, enhancement comes to Rs.2,15,000/-.    

                                           3                                        
                Respondent No.2/ insurance company  shall pay the  amount of        
                Rs.2,15,000/- within a period of 60 days with 6% interest from the date of
                claim application. After the amount of compensation is deposited by 
                respondent No.2/insurance company, learned Tribunal shall pass      
                appropriate order for apportionment, investment and disbursement.   
             10.                                                                    
                The appeal thus partly allowed.                                     
                                                            Sd/-                    
                                                     (Sachin Singh Rajput )         
                                                          Judge                     
    Deepti