Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2020 DAILYLAW 609 (CHH)

SMT. BED BAI DHRUV v. SAKIRIT SAHU

MAC/846/2020 · 2026-07-01

Shri Sanjay K Agrawal

body2020

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 MAC No. 846 of 2020 2026:CGHC:27224 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 846 of 2020 1. Smt. Bed Bai Dhruv W/o Late Bipat Ram Dhruv, Aged About 40 Years; 2. Minor Pankaj Dhruv S/o Late Bipat Ram Dhruv, Aged About 8 Years, Minor Through Natural Guardian Mother Bed Bai Dhruv Wife Of Bipat Ram Dhruv (Appellant No. 01) Both are R/o Village Bitkuli, Police Station City Kotwali Balodabazar District Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh., At Present R/o Asnind, Police Station And Tahsil Kasdol, District Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. ... Appellants versus 1. Sakirit Sahu S/o Itwari Sahu, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Village Taldevari, Police Station Birra, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh. (Driver Of Offending Truck Capsule No. CG-07, BK-5157). 2. Dalvir Singh (Died And Deleted) Nil. 3. The New India Insurance Company Limited Divisional Office, First Floor Madina Building, Katchari Chowk, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Appellants :- Mr. Praveen K. Dhurandhar, Advocate For Respondent No.3 :- Mr. Raj Awasthi, Advocate. ANKIT KUMAR SINGH Digitally signed by ANKIT KUMAR SINGH 2 MAC No. 846 of 2020 SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment On Board 02.07.2026 1. This appeal has been filed by the appellants/claimants under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “Act of 1988”) seeking enhancement in the compensation amount, against the impugned award dated 20.11.2019 passed by the 2nd Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Balodabazar, Chhattisgarh (for short “Claims Tribunal”) in Claim Case No. 10/2019, whereby the Claims Tribunal allowed the claimants’ application and awarded 9,10,000/- along with interest for ₹ death of Bipat Ram Dhruv. 2. Mr. Praveen K. Dhurandhar, learned counsel for the appellants, would submit that the Claims Tribunal has erred in awarding the less compensation. He would also submit that the Claims Tribunal erred in assessing income of the deceased 6,000/- per month which should be 8,060/- per ₹ ₹ month as per Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the office of the Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh. He would further submit that under the head of consortium amount has not been awarded by the Claims Tribunal which is liable to be awarded. 3. Mr. Raj Awasthi, learned counsel for the Insurance Company/respondent No.3, would oppose the prayer made 3 MAC No. 846 of 2020 by learned counsel for the appellant and submit that under the heads of loss of estate and funeral expenses amount awarded by the Claims Tribunal is no higher side which is liable to be reduced. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein above and gone through the records minutely. 5. Learned Claims Tribunal assessed the monthly income of deceased to be ₹6,000/- however, in the opinion of this Court, as per the Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the office of Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh, the monthly income of the deceased should be 8,060/- (as ₹ per minimum wages prescribed at relevant time). Furthermore, under the head of consortium amount is liable to be awarded. In opinion of this Court, under the heads of Loss of Estate and Funeral Expenses amount is liable to be reduced as per the decisions of the Supreme Court. 6. Thus, in light of the aforesaid discussion and in light of the judgments of the Supreme Court rendered in the matters of National Insurance Company Ltd. V. Pranay Sethi 1, Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Ors2 and 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 4 MAC No. 846 of 2020 Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors 3 , this Court is computing the compensation as below:- Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1. Income ₹6,000/- 8,060/- ₹ 2. Future Prospect (+)25% = 15,00/-; Total = 7,500/- ₹ (+)25% = 2,015 ₹ /-; Total = ₹8,060+2,015= 10,075/- ₹ 3. Deduction (-) 1/3 = 2,500/-; ₹ ₹7,500-2,500= 5,000/- ₹ (-) 1/3 = 3,358/-; ₹ ₹10,075-3,358= 6,717/- ₹ 4. Yearly Income ₹5,000 x 12 = 60,000/- ₹ ₹6,717 x 12 = 80,604/- ₹ 5. Multiplier (x) 14= ₹8,40,000/- (x) 14= 11,28,456 ₹ /- 6. Loss of Estate ₹50,000/- 18,000/- ₹ 7. Funeral Expenses ₹20,000/- 18,000/- ₹ 8. Consortium Nil ₹48,000 x 2 = 96,000/- ₹ Total ₹9,10,000/- ₹12,60,456 /- 7. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of 9,10,000 ₹ /- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to 12,60,456 ₹ /-. Hence, after deducting the amount of ₹9,10,000 /-, the appellants/claimants are held to be entitled to an additional amount of 3,50,456/- ₹ . The concerned respondent is directed to deposit the amount of compensation as enhanced by this Court within a period of three months 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 5 MAC No. 846 of 2020 from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @6% per annum from the date of filing of claim application before the Tribunal till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. 8. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed in part and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Ankit