1 CGHC010250892024 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1494 of 2024 1 - Ramlal Kaiwartya S/o Baldev Kaiwartya Aged About 55 Years R/o Village Mudpar, P.S. And Tehsil Kasdol, District- Baloda Bazar- Bhatapara, C.G. 2 - Smt. Resham Bai Kaiwartya W/o Ramlal Kaiwartya Aged About 53 Years R/o Village Mudpar, P.S. And Tehsil Kasdol, District- Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara, C.G. ... Appellants versus 1 - Ravi Yadav S/o Tijram Yadav Aged About 22 Years R/o Shivrinarayan, P.S. And Tehsil Shivrinarayan, District- Janjgir- Champa, C.G. (Driver Of The Offending Vehicle Motor Cycle No. C.G.11 A.R. 2889) 2 - Ghanshyam Kevat S/o Keshav Prasad Kevat Present Address- C/o Niraj Kumar Kaiwartya, Village Banahil, P.S. Mulmula, District- Janjgir-Champa, C.G., Permanent Address- Kashi Nagar, Korba, District- Korba, C.G. (Owner Of The Offending Vehicle Motor Cycle No. C.G.11 A.R. 2889) 3 - Ifco Tokiyo General Insurance Company Shop No. 205, Second Floor, M M Silver Plaza, Mining Office Mahavir Nagar, Ring Road No. 1, Raipur, District Raipur, C.G. (Insurer Company Of The Offending Vehicle Motor Cycle No. C.G.11 A.R. 2889) --- Respondent(s) For Appellants : Mr. Suresh Kumar Verma, Advocate For Respondents No.1 & 2 : None For Respondents No.3 : Mr. Swapnil Thawaney, Advocate SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2026.08.07 15:15:19 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Judgment on Board (06.08.2026) 1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short the "Act of 1988") has been preferred by the appellants/claimants seeking enhancement of the amount of compensation, challenging the impugned award dated 05.03.2024, passed in Claim Case No.55/2020, by the 1st Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Balodabazar- Bhatapara (C.G.), whereby the learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.14,64,360/- as compensation for death of Vinod Kumar Kaiwartya who was aged about 28 years and died in a road accident which took place on 16.02.2020. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the learned Claims Tribunal has erred in awarding lesser amount of compensation in the facts of the case. The Claims Tribunal has wrongly added only 30% towards future prospects instead of 40% and has awarded lesser amount under conventional heads. Therefore, the instant appeal be allowed and the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal may suitably be enhanced. 3. Learned counsel for respondent No.3/insurance company would submit that the Claims Tribunal after appreciating oral and documentary evidence available on record rightly awarded the compensation amount. Hence, the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is just and proper and requires no interference. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered 3 their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection. 5. In the case at hand, the learned Tribunal has granted 30% future prospect. However, as per the law laid down in National Insurance Company Ltd. V. Pranay Sethi1, for a self-employed person below the age of 40 years, 40% towards future prospects ought to be added instead of 30% as granted by the Tribunal. Further, the amount awarded under conventional heads also requires enhancement. To that extent, the impugned award needs modification. 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 & Ors2 and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors3, this Court is computing the compensation as below:- Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1 Income Rs. 8600 x 12 = 1,03,200/- Rs. 8600 x 12 = 1,03,200/- 2. Future prospect (+)30% (i.e. Rs. 30,960) = 1,34,160/- (+)40% (i.e. Rs. 41,280) = 1,44,480/- 3. Deduction (-) 1/2 (i.e. 67,080) = 67,080/- (-) 1/2 (i.e. 72,240) = 72,240/- 4. Multiplier (x) 17 = 11,40,360/- (x) 17 = 12,28,080/- 5 Other Rs. 70,000/- Rs. 1,21,000/- 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 4 conventional heads (16500+16500+880 00) 6 Medical Expenses Rs. 2,50,000/- Rs. 2,50,000/- 7 Towards attendant Rs. 4,000/- Rs. 4,000/- Total Rs. 14,64,360/- Rs.16,03,080/- 7. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs.14,64,360/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.16,03,080/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs.14,64,360/-, the appellants are held entitled for an additional amount of Rs.1,38,720/-. The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from filing of the claim application before the Claims Tribunal till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award including the order of pay and recover shall remain intact. 8. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. 9. The Registry is directed to communicate the claimants in writing “the enhanced amount” in this appeal as against the award made by the concerned Tribunal. 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 resides. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge -Shubham