1 CGHC010268572023 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1517 of 2023 Shriram General Insurance Company Limited Head Office, E-8 Riicoi, Industrial Area, Sitapura, Jaipur (Rajasthan) Through - Regional Manager Having Regional Office At Plot No.1, 4th Floor, Maruti Heights, Besides Sky Auto Maruti Dealer, Mahoba Bazar, Besides R.K.Mall, G.E. Road Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Appellant versus 1 - Poonam Wd/o Late Mantoon Sharma Aged About 47 Years R/o House No. 13, Kankalin Para, Kanker, District Kanker (Chhattisgarh) Presently Residing At Village Temri, P.S. Mana Camp, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) - Claimants - 2 - Sapna Sharma D/o Late Mantoon Sharma Aged About 21 Years R/o House No. 13, Kankalin Para, Kanker, District Kanker (Chhattisgarh) Presently Residing At Village Temri, P.S. Mana Camp, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) - Claimants - 3 - Isha Sharma S/o Late Mantoon Sharma Aged About 20 Years R/o House No. 13, Kankalin Para, Kanker, District Kanker (Chhattisgarh) Presently Residing At Village Temri, P.S. Mana Camp, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) - Claimants - 4 - Jageshwar Nag S/o Bullu Ram Nag Aged About 35 Years R/o Hanpatri, P.S. Durg Kondal, Bhanupratappur, District Kanker (Chhattisgarh) – Driver-- SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2026.08.06 10:56:25 +0530 2 5 - Rakesh Kumar Jain S/o Chintalal Jain Aged About 36 Years R/o House No.1, Patelpara, Khootgaon, Bhanupratappur, P.S. Durg Konal, District Kanker (Chhattisgarh) -- Owner -- --- Respondent(s) For Appellant : Mr. Swapnil Thawaney, Advocate on behalf of Mr. P.R. Patankar, Advocate For Respondents : None Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Judgment on Board (05.08.2026) 1. This is an insurer’s appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 challenging the award dated 24.04.2023 passed by 8th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur (C.G.) in Claim Case No.966/2021 for reduction of the amount of compensation, whereby the learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.18,84,400/- with interest @ 8 per annum as compensation in favour of the claimants for death of Sonu Sharma who was aged about 23 years and died in a road accident which took place on 12.07.2021. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company has only challenged the quantum part of the impugned award and argued that at the time of accident, the age of deceased, Sonu Sharma, was 23 years and he was unmarried. Therefore, the deduction towards personal and living expenses ought to be 1/2 instead of 1/3, which was erroneously applied by the Tribunal. It is, thus, prayed that the amount of compensation be suitably reduced. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant, considered 3 his rival submission made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection. 4. Now, this Court shall examine as to whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the given facts and circumstances of the case. 5. As per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi & Others, (2017) 16 SCC 680, in the case of an unmarried deceased, the deduction towards personal and living expenses is required to be 50%. The deceased, Sonu Sharma was 23 years and was unmarried at the time of the accident. Therefore, the Tribunal committed an error in applying deduction of 1/3 instead of 1/2. Accordingly, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal deserves to be suitably modified by applying 50% deduction. Furthermore, the learned Tribunal has taken the monthly income of the deceased to be Rs.9,000/-. As the date of accident is 12.07.2021 and as per the Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the office of Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh the income of the deceased ought to be Rs.9,200/-. Furthermore, in other conventional heads, the Tribunal has granted only 70,000 which ought to be 1,65,000/- as per Pranay Sethi (Supra), to that extent the impugned award needs to be modified. 6. Thus, in light of the aforesaid discussion and in light of the judgments of the Supreme Court rendered in the matters of Pranay Sethi (Supra), Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Ors1 and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors2, 1 (2009) 6 SCC 121 2 (2018) 18 SCC 130 4 this Court is computing the compensation as below:- Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1 Income Rs. 9000 x 12 = 1,08,000/- Rs. 9200 x 12 = 1,10,400/- 2. Future prospect (+)40% (i.e. Rs. 43,200) = 1,51,200/- (+)40% (i.e. Rs. 44,160) = 1,54,560/- 3. Deduction (-) 1/3 (i.e. 50400) = 1,00,800/- (-) 1/2 (i.e. 77280) = 77,280/- 4. Multiplier (x) 18 = 18,14,400/- (x) 18 = 13,91,040/- 5 Other conventional heads Rs. 70,000/- Rs. 1,65,000/- (16500+16500+132 000) Total Rs. 18,84,400/- Rs. 15,56,040/- 7. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs.18,84,400/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is reduced to Rs.15,56,040/-. Hence, the claimants are held entitled to get an amount of Rs.15,65,040/-. The remaining conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the insurance company is partly allowed and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge -Shubham