NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR M.A.(C) No. 1285 of 2023 1 - Smt. Preminbai Mahilang W/o Late Kejuram Mahilang Aged About 66 Years R/o Village Birkoni, Ward No. 04, Satnamipara, Police Station And District Mahasamund, C.G. 2 - Ghanshyam Mandloi S/o Late Santram Mandloi Aged About 23 Years R/o Village Birkoni, Ward No. 04, Satnamipara, Police Station And District Mahasamund, C.G. 3 - Umashankar Mandloi S/o Late Santram Mandloi Aged About 21 Years R/o Village Birkoni, Ward No. 04, Satnamipara, Police Station And District Mahasamund, C.G. 4 - Minor Rajesh Mandloi W/o Late Santram Mandloi Aged About 10 Years By Guardian Elder Brother Ghanshyam Mandloi, R/o Village Birkoni, Ward No. 04, Satnamipara, Police Station And District Mahasamund, C.G. --- Appellants Versus 1 - Ashok Kumar Singh S/o Baramdev Singh Aged About 44 Years R/o Shyamnagar Ringroad Telibandha, District - Raipur, C.G. (Driver Of Mini Bus No. C.G.- 04 E A - 0257) 2 - M/s Sai Travels Naya Bus Stand Pandari Raipur, District- Raipur, C.G. (Owner Of Mini Bus No. C.G.-04 E.A.-0257) 3 - Branch Manager The New India Insurance Co. Ltd. L.I.C. Building, Vyavsayik Parisar Second Floor Shyam Square, Pandari Raipur, District- Raipur, C.G. (Insurance Company Of Mini Bus No. C.G.-04 E.A.-0257) --- Respondents __________________________________________________________________ For Appellants : Shri Kripesh G. Kela, Advocate. For Respondent No.3 : Shri Raj Awasthi, Advocate. __________________________________________________________________ Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput Order on Board 01 /04/2026 1. This appeal has been filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short ‘MV Act’) by the appellants/claimants, being aggrieved by the award dated 28.10.2022 passed by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Fast Track Court, District – Mahasamund (C.G.) (hereinafter referred to as “Tribunal”) in Claims Case No. H-114/2019. ASHISH TIWARI Digitally signed by ASHISH TIWARI Date: 2026.04.10 10:43:00 +0530 -2- 2. By the impugned award, against a claim of Rs.62,40,000/-, the learned Tribunal has awarded Rs.16,62,600/- along-with interest as compensation to the appellants / claimants on account of the death of the deceased Santram Mandaloi in an motor vehicular accident that occurred on 15.07.2018 by the rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle Minibus bearing registration No. CG/04-EA/0257 by respondent No.1/driver; owned by respondent No. 2/Owner and Insured with respondent No.3 (Insurance Company). 3. As per pleadings in the claim application filed under section 166 of the MV Act by the appellants / claimants, on the date of accident i.e. 15.07.2018, the deceased Santram Mandaloi was crossing-road walking with his motorcycle at NH-53 Birkoni Main Road, at that time the driver of the offending vehicle Minibus by rash and negligent driving dashed the motorcycle of the deceased, as a result of which he sustained severe injuries and was admitted to District Hospital Mahasamund for intensive care, he was referred to Mekhahara Hospital, Raipur where he died during treatment on 16.07.2018. The accident was reported to Police Station – Mahasamund, District – Mahasamund upon which the offense under section 304 of the IPC against the driver of the vehicle was registered in Crime No. 114/2019. The deceased was performing the job of labour and was earning Rs. 400/- per day and he is the bread winner for his family. 4. The respondent Nos. 1 and 2 by filing joint written statement denied the averments of the claim application. They have stated that the driver of the offending vehicle is having valid and effective driving license. The amount of compensation is claim exaggerated and liability has to be fastened upon the Insurance Company. -3- 5. The respondent No. 3 also filed its written statement and denied the averments, and in usual course pleaded that the offending vehicle was not having valid permit and the accident occurred due to negligence of the deceased himself and therefore, the application may be rejected. 6. On the basis of above broad pleadings, the learned Tribunal framed five issues and decided the same in favour of the appellants/claimants and awarded the above stated compensation. 7. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the deceased was a mason but Tribunal has assessed monthly income of Rs.8100/- on the basis of unskilled labour and skilled worker as such minimum wages which requires suitable enhancement on account of income. 8. Learned counsel for respondent supports the award and submits that the appellants/claimants could not bring any document on record to show the profession and the income of the deceased, therefore just compensation has been awarded which does not require any interference. 9. Heard the learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions and also perused the record. 10.So far as determination of income of deceased is concerned, of course no documentary evidence is available on record to suggest the income and profession of the deceased. The learned Claims Tribunal assessed the monthly income of the deceased on the basis of minimum wages. There are four dependents upon the income of the deceased including minor children and parents. The wife of the deceased had predeceased him. As deceased had attained mature age, he cannot be equated with unskilled labour. Therefore, this Court is inclined to treat him as a skilled labour and therefore he can be entitled to minimum wages of Rs. 9000/- per month. Taking into consideration all aspects of the matter, age of the deceased at the time of -4- accident; the minimum wages and number of dependents, this Court assesses the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.9000/- . In view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matters of Smt. Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr., (2009) 6 SCC 121; National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC 680 and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd.v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors; (2018) 18 SCC 130, the claimants are entitled for compensation in the following manner:- S.No. Head Calculation 1. Income of the deceased @ 9000/- per month Rs.1,08,000/- per annum (9000 X 12 ) 2. Future prospect 25% Rs.1,35,000/- (1,08,000 + 27000) 3. Income after ¼th deduction towards personal and living expenses of the deceased Rs.1,35,000/- (1,35,000 - 33750) 4. Multiplier of 15 to be applied Rs. 15,18,750/- (101250 x 15 ) 5. Towards loss of estate and funeral expenses Rs.30,000/- 6. Parental and filial consortium Rs.1,60,000/- (Rs.40,000/- each to appellant nos. 1 to 4) Total compensation Rs. 17,08,750/- 11. Since the tribunal has already awarded Rs.13,65,000/-, after deducting the same from the above amount, the claimants are held entitled for additional compensation of Rs.3,43,750/- with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of appeal i.e. 22/07/2023. The amount shall be deposited by the respondent No.3 / Insurance Company within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of this order. 12. After deposit being made, Rs. 1,00,000/- shall be disbursed to appellant No. 1, Rs.50,000/- (each) shall be invested in the name of appellant Nos. 2 and 3 as fixed deposit in a Nationalized Bank for a period of 2 years. Rs. 75,000/- -5- shall be invested in the name of appellant No. 4 as fixed deposit in a Nationalized Bank for a period of 2 years. Remaining amount shall be paid equally to appellant Nos.1 to 3 by bank transaction / account payee cheque. 13. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part with modification in the award impugned to the above extent. Sd/-Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge -/ Ashish