-1- NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1364 of 2022 1 - Veena Singh W/o Late Kunwar Bahadur Singh Aged About 42 Years R/o Vijaypur Boirdadar, Police Station Chakradhar Nagar, Tahsil And District Raigarh Chhattisgarh 2 - Minor Vishal Singh S/o Late Kunwar Bahadur Singh Aged About 15 Years R/o Vijaypur Boirdadar, Police Station Chakradhar Nagar, Tahsil And District Raigarh Chhattisgarh 3 - Minor Shlok Singh S/o Late Kunwar Bahadur Singh Aged About 12 Years R/o Vijaypur Boirdadar, Police Station Chakradhar Nagar, Tahsil And District Raigarh Chhattisgarh 4 - Minor Simmi Singh D/o Late Kunwar Bahadur Singh Aged About 10 Years R/o Vijaypur Boirdadar, Police Station Chakradhar Nagar, Tahsil And District Raigarh Chhattisgarh ... Appellants versus 1 - Rajendra Kumar Yadav S/o Late Kuber Prasad Yadav Aged About 35 Years R/o Kayaghat, Police Station City Kotwali Raigarh, Tahsil And District Raigarh Chhattisgarh 2 - The Royal Sundram Company Ltd Through Branch Manager, Branch Office At First Floor Rama Trade Center, Opp. Rajiv Plaza, Near, Bus Stand, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Appellants/Claimants : Mr. Ramayan Yadav, Advocate For respondent No.2/Insurance : Mr. Anupam Dubey, Advocate Company Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 19.02.2026 1) Heard. 2) The appellants/claimants have filed this appeal for enhancement of REKHA SINGH -2- compensation assailing the judgment and award passed by the learned Fifth Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) in Claim Case No.135/2021 dated 16.09.2022 whereby, the learned Tribunal has granted compensation to the tune of Rs.16,39,000/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum on account of death of Kunwar Bahadur Singh in motor accident. 3) The facts in brief are that on 14.05.2021 at around 6:30 p.m., the deceased Kunwar Bahadur Singh was returning from work, he was dashed by a pick-up bearing registration No.C.G.13AA-7666, resultantly, he sustained injuries and succumbed to death. 4) The claimants, who are widow and three minor children filed a claim case under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, wherein, they pleaded that age of the deceased at the time of accident was 42 years and he was a Senior Officer in Automobile Department of Maa Shakambari Steel Limited, earning Rs.12,400/- per month. They claimed a sum of Rs.83,32,000/- per annum. 5) The Insurance Company filed reply and denied averments made in the claim petition. Learned Tribunal framed issues; parties led evidence and thereafter, award was passed. 6) Learned counsel appearing for the appellants/claimants would submit that the deceased was a Senior Officer in Automobile Department of Maa Shakambari Steel Limited and earning Rs.12,400/- per month. He -3- would further submit that the claimants have placed on record Ex.P/1 to P/5 to establish that the deceased was an employee of Maa Shakambari Steel Limited and his salary was Rs.12,400/- per month. He would contend that the claimants examined Sudhir Mishra (AW2), Director of the Company, who proved the fact that the deceased was an employee of the Company and his earning was Rs.12,400/- per month. Mr. Yadav would further contend that the learned Tribunal discarded the evidence and assessed income of deceased Rs.9,200/- per month on the ground that the salary slips do not contain signature of authorized officer of the Company. He would submit that the claimants proved the income of deceased by leading oral as well as documentary evidence. He would further submit that the learned Tribunal has granted meager amount on conventional heads. He would pray to enhance the compensation accordingly. 7) On the other hand, Mr. Dubey, learned counsel appearing for the respondent/Insurance Company would oppose the submissions made by Mr. Yadav. He would submit that the learned Tribunal has granted just and proper compensation. He would further submit that the claimants failed to prove income of the deceased leading cogent evidence and thus, the appeal deserves to be dismissed. 8) I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection. -4- 9) Admittedly, the deceased was an employee of Maa Shakambari Steel Limited Company, where, he was posted as Senior Officer in Automobile Department. 10) Sudhir Mishra (AW2), Director of the Company proved appointment order vide Ex.P/1 and salary slips vide Ex.P/2 to P/5. 11) Learned Tribunal has ignored those documents on the ground that those documents do not contain signatures of any officer. The findings recorded by the learned Tribunal in this regard appear to be erroneous. The claimants succeeded to prove the fact that the deceased was an employee of company and he was earning Rs.12,400/- per month, therefore, learned Tribunal should have considered the income of deceased according to salary slips. On the other heads, learned Tribunal has granted just and proper compensation. 12) Taking into consideration the above-discussed facts, in my opinion, the compensation requires recomputation and same is being revisited herein below: Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded by Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1. Income Rs.9,200x12=Rs.1,10,400 Rs.12,400x12=Rs.1,48,800/- 2. Deduction (-) 1/4 =Rs.27,600/- 1,10,400 – 27,600 = 82,800 (-) 1/4 = Rs.37,200/- 1,48,800–37,200= 1,11,600/- 3. Multiplier (x) 14 = Rs. 11,59,200/- (x) 14= Rs.15,62,400/- -5- 4. Future Prospect 25% of 11,59,200 = 2,89,800 11,59,200 + 2,89,800 =14,49,000 25% of 15,62,400 = 3,90,600/- 15,62,400+3,90,600=19,53,000 5. Other heads- loss of Consortium (for appellants/claimant) Rs.40,000/- x 4 = 1,60,000/- Rs.40,000/- x 4 = 1,60,000/- 6. Funeral expenses Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 15,000/- 7. Loss of Estate Rs.15,000 Rs. 15,000/- 8. Total Rs. 16,39,000/- Rs. 21,43,000/- 13) Accordingly, the amount of compensation of Rs.16,39,000/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.21,43,000/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs.16,39,000/-, the appellants are entitled for an additional amount of Rs.5,04,000/-. The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of application till the date of its realization. The rest of the terms and conditions of award shall remain intact. 14) Accordingly, this appeal is allowed in part and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Rekha