1 CGHC010196832024 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No.1203 of 2024 1. Rajkumari Rajwade W/o Late Mahendra Rajwade, Aged About 32 Years 2. Vinod Kumar, S/o Late Mahendra Rajwade, Aged About 11 Years 3. Sakshi Rajwade, D/o Late Mahendra Rajwade, Aged About 8 Years 4. Baabi Rajwade, W/o Kashi Rajwade, Aged About 55 Years 5. Kashi Rajwade, S/o Late Manohar Rajwade, Aged About 57 Years Applicant No.2 and 3 are minor through natural guardian W/o Late Mahendra Rajwade, All R/o Village Semara Khurd, Post Kevra, PS and Tahsil Pratappur, District Surguja (C.G.) ... Appellants/Claimants versus 1. Girdhar Gopal Gupta S/o Late Gulab Chandra Gupta, Aged About 60 Years Occupation Vehicle Driver, R/o Deviganj Road (Infront Of Anand Darshan) Ambikapur P.S. and Tahil Ambikapur District Surguja Chhattisgarh. (Vehicle Driver). 2. Mahendra Singh Chabra, S/o Santosh Singh Chabra, Occupation Vehicle Owner, R/o Chabra Bus Service, Ring RoAd Gangapur, Ambikapur, P.S. And Gangapur, Ambikapur, P.S. And Tahsil Ambikapur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh. (Vehicle Owner). 3. Branch Manager, The New India Insurance Company Limited, Ambika Petrol Pump Campus, Near Ambedkar Chowk, Banaras Road Ambikapur, P.S. And Tahsil Ambikapur District Surguja Chhattisgarh. (Insurance Company) ... Respondents For Appellant : Mr. C. Jayant K. Rao, Advocate. For Respondent No.1 & 2 : Mr. Anshul. R. Shrivastava, Advocate. For Respondent No.3 : Mr. Anil Gulati, Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board Digitally signed by R NIRALA 2 21/07/2026 1. The appellants/claimants have filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “M.V. Act”) seeking enhancement of amount of compensation, challenging the award dated 22.09.2023 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ambikapur (Surguja) (C.G.) (for short “Claims Tribunal”) in Claim Case No.141/2022, whereby the learned Claims Tribunal allowed the application filed under Section 166 of the Act, 1988 in part and awarded total sum of Rs.14,81,200/-, as compensation, on account of death of deceased Mahendra. 2. Facts of the case are that on 24.05.2022, while the deceased Mahendra Rajwade and his friend, i.e., Ram Khelavan were going to repair Submersible Pump from Semara Khurd to Latori, then night about 10.30PM, the Bus having registration no. CG-15-AB-1151, at Ambikapur-Banaras Road in front of Manraj House Village Gangapur, driving the same rashly and negligently on wrong side and dash the deceased and his friend resulting which the deceased received grievous injuries on his head, chest, face and other parts of the body and his friend Ram Khelavan also received grievous injuries resulting death of Mahendra Rajwade on the spot and his friend Ram Khelavan injured grievously. The Police of Police station Latori registered the offences against the driver of the vehicle. 3. An accident occurred on 24.05.2022 by rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle ‘Bus’ bearing Registration No.CG-15-AB-1151 driven by respondent No.1/driver, which was owned by respondent No.2/owner and insured with the respondent No.3/insurance company. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the income of the deceased has wrongly been assessed by the learned Claims Tribunal as Rs.7,000/- per month, contrary to the evidence produced before the tribunal, as the deceased was working as a mason and was earning Rs.12,000/- per month. 3 He further submits that amount under other heads is also on the lower side. As such, the appeal may be allowed and the compensation may suitably enhanced. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.3/Insurance Company supported the impugned award with regard to the quantum part. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of claim case available on record. 7. Though the appellants/claimants pleaded that the deceased Mahendra Rajwade was working as a mason and was earning Rs. 36,000/- per month, no documentary evidence has been produced thereof. Therefore, considering the wage structure on the date of the accident, the income of the deceased is assessed to Rs. 9,960/- per month. 8. The accident occurred on 24.05.2022. The deceased was aged about 35 years. There are total 5 claimants. Considering the age of the deceased, the number of dependents and his occupation, this Count finds that the assessment made by the Tribunal regarding the addition towards future prospects, the deduction towards personal expenses and the multiplier adopted is just and proper. However, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under other conventional heads is liable to be suitably enhanced. 9. Thus, in light of the aforesaid discussion and judgments of the Supreme Court rendered in the matters of National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC 680; Sarla Verma and others v. Delhi Transport Corporation and others, (2009) 6 SCC 121 and; Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram and others, (2018) 18 SCC 130, the compensation is recomputed as under: 4 S.No. Heads Compensation Awarded by the Tribunal Compensatio n Awarded by this Court 1. Income Rs.7,000/- Rs.9,960/- 2. Addition towards loss of future prospects 40% Rs.7000 + 2800 = Rs.9,800/- Rs.9960 + 3984 = Rs.13,944/- 3. 1/4th Deduction towards personal expenses Rs.9,800 – 2450 = Rs.7,350/- Rs.13,944 – 3486 = Rs.10,458/- 4. After applying multiplier of 16 Rs.7350 x 12 x 16 = Rs.14,11,200/- Rs.10,458 x 12 x 16 = Rs.20,07,936/- 5. Loss of consortium to claimants Rs.40,000 Rs.48,000 x 5 = Rs.2,40,000/- 6. Loss of Estate Rs.15,000/- Rs.18,000/- 7. Loss of Funeral Expenses Rs.15,000 Rs.18,000/- TOTAL Rs.14,81,200/- Rs.22,83,936/- 10. The learned Tribunal has awarded Rs.14,81,200/- which is deducted from the total compensation and now awarded and the enhanced compensation comes to Rs.8,02,736/- (Rs.22,83,936 – Rs.14,81,200). Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, interest @ 6% is also awarded on the enhanced amount of compensation from the date of filing of the claim petition before the Tribunal till its realization. The impugned award stands modified to the above extent and rest of the conditions shall remain intact. 11. The Registry is further directed to communicate the claimants in writing “the enhanced amount” in this appeal as against the award made by the Tribunal below. The said communication be made in Hindi Deonagri language and the help of paralegal workers may be availed with a co-ordination of Secretary, Legal Aid of the concerned area wherein the claimants reside. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Nirala