1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1637 of 2018 1 - Smt. Santoshi Sahu W/o Late Mohit Kumar Sahu Aged About 35 Years R/o Kailash Nagar, Birgoan, Police Station Urla, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Chandrashekhar Sahu S/o Late Mohit Kumar Sahu Aged About 14 Years Minor On Behalf Of Through Their Legal Guardian Mother Smt. Santoshi Sahu, W/o Late Mohit Kumar Sahu Appellant No. 1), R/o Kailash Nagar, Birgoan, Police Station Urla, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Tukendra Sahu S/o Late Mohit Kumar Sahu Aged About 12 Years Minor On Behalf Of Through Their Legal Guardian Mother Smt. Santoshi Sahu, W/o Late Mohit Kumar Sahu Appellant No. 1), R/o Kailash Nagar, Birgoan, Police Station Urla, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Ku. Sandhya Sahu D/o Late Mohit Kumar Sahu Aged About 10 Years Minor On Behalf Of Through Their Legal Guardian Mother Smt. Santoshi Sahu, W/o Late Mohit Kumar Sahu Appellant No. 1), R/o Kailash Nagar, Birgoan, Police Station Urla, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. (Claimants), District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus ABHIGYA SAXENA Digitally signed by ABHIGYA SAXENA 2 1 - Naresh Kumar Sahu S/o Kartik Ram Sahu Aged About 46 Years R/o Rawan Bhata, Mandir Hasoud, Ghasiram Nagar, Bhilai, Police Station Jamul, District Durg Chhattisgarh. (Driver Of Vehicle Truck Bearing Registration No. Cg/04/g/6311), District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Sunil Kumar Agrawal (Died And Deleted) As Per Honble Court Order Dated 11-01-2024. 3 - The National Insurance Company Limited, Through Divisional Manager, Divisional Office, G.E. Road, Raipur, Tahsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh. (Insurer Of Vehicle Truck Bearing Registration No. Cg/04/g/6311)., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shiv Sewak, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Dinesh Yeadav, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sanjay Patel, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board (13.01.2026) 1. Heard on I.A. No.01 – an application for condonation of delay. 2. Upon due consideration and for the reasons assigned in the application, the same is allowed. Delay of 80 days in filing the appeal is heareby condoned. 3. With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally. 4. This appeal arises out of the award dated 21.02.2018 passed by the 8th Additional/Upper Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur District Raipur (C.G.) in Claim Case No.799/2015 whereby a compensation of Rs.12,98,500/- with interest @ 08% per annum, in favour of the appellants/claimants for their irreparable loss. 3 5. The facts, in brief, necessary for disposal of this appeal, are that it is an undisputed fact that the deceased, Mohit Kumar Sahu, aged about 40 years, was employed as a Foreman (Senior Fitter) with Mahamaya Steel Industries Limited, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.), and was earning approximately ₹26,000/- per month for the maintenance of his family. On 07.11.2015 at about 06:00 PM, while the deceased was proceeding on his own motorcycle along with a friend, upon reaching near Super Dharamkanta, Ring Road No. 2, Sarora, within the limits of Police Station Urla, District Raipur (C.G.), the offending vehicle, i.e., Truck bearing registration No. C.G. 04/G/6311, driven by respondent No. 1 in a rash and negligent manner, dashed into the motorcycle from the front, resulting in the deceased sustaining grievous injuries and succumbing to them on the spot. A report was duly lodged at Police Station Urla, District Raipur (C.G.), and an offence was registered against respondent No. 1; at the relevant time, respondent No. 1 and respondent No. 2 were the driver and registered owner of the offending vehicle respectively, and the vehicle was validly insured with respondent No. 3, the Insurance Company. The appellant Nos. 1 to 4, being the wife and children of the deceased and wholly dependent upon his income, preferred a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking compensation under various heads. The learned Claims Tribunal, after framing seven issues and recording evidence, passed the impugned award dated 21.02.2018 granting a total compensation of ₹12,98,500/- under the heads of loss of income (₹12,28,500/-), funeral expenses (₹15,000/-), loss of consortium (₹40,000/-), and loss of estate 4 (₹15,000/-), while awarding nil amounts towards love and affection, medical expenses, and mental pain and suffering; however, the said award is grossly inadequate, having been passed without proper appreciation of the facts, evidence, and the settled principles governing compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, thereby necessitating enhancement by way of the present appeal. 6. Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side and needs to be enhanced suitably. The learned Claims Tribunal has committed a grave legal error in disbelieving the testimony of the claimants’ witnesses, who were duly examined in support of their pleadings. The rejection of their statements amounts to a failure in appreciating the evidence on record. The learned Claims Tribunal erred in holding that the Tribunal has failed to consider the future prospect of the deceased. In light of the precedents set by this Hon’ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi and Others 1 . It ought to have considered that the deceased left behind wife & children making a total of four dependents. The findings recorded by the learned Claims Tribunal are perverse and contrary to law, and therefore liable to be set aside. The Tribunal’s conclusions run contrary to the documentary evidence and oral testimony on record, reflecting a failure to properly consider the facts in their correct perspective. In light of the above, the appellants respectfully pray that the impugned award be set aside and the claim be enhanced as per the submissions made herein. 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 5 7. On the other hand, it has argued on behalf of the counsel for respondent Insurance Company that in the facts and circumstances of the case at hand, the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal requires no interference of this Court and no further enhancement is required to be made, therefore, the appeal filed by the claimants is liable to be dismissed. 8. I Heard counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record with utmost circumspection. 9. In a motor accident claim case, what is important is that, the compensation to be awarded by the Courts/Tribunals should be just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the case. It should neither be a meager amount of compensation, nor a Bonanza. 10. Now this Court shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.12,98,500/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the given facts and circumstances of the case. 11. The Tribunal has correctly assessed the loss of dependency in accordance with the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi and Sarla Verma (Smt.) & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr. Since the deceased was married and the claimants are his widow and children, the Tribunal has rightly applied the standard deduction towards personal expenses as prescribed in the aforesaid judgments. The selection of the appropriate multiplier is also in consonance with the settled law. 6 Accordingly, the computation of the total loss of dependency at Rs. 12,28,500/- stands justified. 12. The claimants are further entitled for loss of estate Rs. 18,000/- (10% increase in every three years), for funeral expenses Rs. 18,000/- (10% increase in every three years) and as per Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nanu, 2 the claimants are further entitled for loss of consortium Rs. 48,000/- (10% increase in every three years) each i.e. Rs.1,92,000/-. Therefore, the claimants would become entitled for total compensation of Rs.14,56,500/-. In light of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Rajkumar Vs. Ajay Kumar & Ors 3 , this Court reassesses the compensation in the following manner:- Sn. Heads Calculation 01 Loss of Dependency Rs. 12,28,500/- 02 Towards loss of estate Rs. 18,000/- 03 Funeral Expenses Rs. 18,000/- 04 Towards loss of consortium to all the six claimants @ Rs.48,000/- x 5 Rs. 1,92,000/- Total Rs.14,56,500/- 13. Accordingly, the total compensation is enhanced to Rs.14,56,500/- from Rs.12,98,500/-. Thus, there is an enhancement of Rs.1,58,000/-, which shall carry interest at the same rate as awarded by the Tribunal (8% p.a.) from the date of claim petition till realization. 14. As a result, the appeal is allowed in part. The award dated 2 AIR Online 2018 SC 189 3 (2011) 1 SCC 343 7 21.02.2018 is modified to the extent indicated above. Rest of the terms and conditions of the Tribunal’s award remain intact. 15. Record of the Claims Tribunal be sent back along with a copy of this order forthwith for information and necessary action, if any. Certified Copy as per rules. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) JUDGE Saxena