1 2025:CGHC:37147 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 430 of 2023 1 - Smt. Pooja Manikpuri, W/o. Santosh Manikpuri, Aged About 40 Years, R/o. Village- Kotmer, Thana - Kartala,, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh 2 - Santosh Manikpuri, S/o. Late Ravi Manikpuri, Aged About 45 Years, R/o. Village- Kotmer, Thana - Kartala,, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh ... Appellants versus 1 - Natraj Ganvander, S/o. N.M. Ganvander, Aged About 35 Years, R/o. Darri Basti, Nagoikhar, Thana - Darri, Tahsil - Darri, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh 2 - The United India Insurance Company Limited, Through Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Company Limited, Office Station Road Sitamani Korba, Tahsil And District Korba, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Appellant : Mr. A.L.Singroul, Advocate For Respondent No.2 : Mr. Dashrath Gupta, Advocate ASHOK SAHU Digitally signed by ASHOK SAHU Date: 2025.07.31 17:36:39 +0530 2 (Single Bench) Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment on Board 29/07/2025 1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “Act of 1988”) has been preferred by the appellants/claimants seeking enhancement of amount of compensation, challenging the impugned award dated 21.12.2022 passed by learned First Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Korba in MAC Case No.110/2021, whereby the learned Claims Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs. 15,07,352/- as compensation for the death of Subham Manikpuri, who was a Mason (Rajmistri), aged about 21 years at the time of incident. 2. Brief facts of the case, is that, on 03.06.2021, when Shubham Manikpuri while driving his motorcycle bearing Reg. No.C.G.12-AH-5817 coming to his home at village Kotmer from village Nonbirra, the offending motorcycle bearing Reg. No. CG-12-AX-3134, which was rashly and negligently driven by respondent No.1 herein, dashed the motorcycle of the deceased due to which accident occurred and the deceased died on the spot. 3 3. Appellants, who are wife, mother & father of deceased Shubham Manikpuri, filed an application under Section 166 of the Act of 1988 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for brevity “Claims Tribunal”) seeking compensation to the tune of Rs. 61,55,000/- pleading therein that on the date of accident, deceased Shubham Manikpuri was aged about 21 years and was a sole bread earner of the family and on account of his untimely death in the accident, the appellants have suffered economical and psychological difficulties. 4. Learned Claims Tribunal, upon appreciation of pleadings and evidence placed on record by respective parties, held that deceased Shubham Manikpuri died in the accident arising out of rash and negligent driving of the aforesaid motorcycle driven and owned by respondent No.1 herein and insured by respondent No.2. Breach of conditions of insurance policy was not found to be proved and after calculating the amount of compensation, awarded Rs. 15,07,352/- as total compensation with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of filing of claim application. 5. Mr. Arjun Lal Singroul, learned counsel for the appellants, would submit that learned Claims Tribunal has erred in awarding less amount of compensation in the facts of the 4 case. Claims Tribunal erred in assessing income of deceased as Rs.9460/- per month which should be Rs. 10,110/- as per Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the office of the Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh. Therefore, the instant appeal be allowed and the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal may suitably be enhanced. 6. Mr. Dashrath Gupta, learned counsel for the insurance company/ respondent No.2, would submit that the appellants have failed to prove the exact income of deceased by producing clinching and admissible piece of evidence, hence, the Tribunal is justified in assessing income of deceased on notional basis. The amount of compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is just and proper which does not call for any interference. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and gone through the records minutely. 8. Learned Claims Tribunal assessed the monthly income of deceased Shubham Manikpuri to be 9,460/-, however, in ₹ the opinion of this Court, as per the Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the office of Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh for Manson who is a skilled 5 labour, the monthly income of the deceased should be ₹10,110/- (as per minimum wages prescribed at relevant time) and 1,21,320/- per annum. ₹ 9. Thus, in light of the aforesaid discussion and in light of the judgments of the Supreme Court rendered in the matters of National Insurance Company Ltd. V. Pranay Sethi 1, Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Ors2 and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors 3 , this Court is computing the compensation as below:- Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court Income as per minimum wages ₹ 9,460 x 12 = 1,13,520/- ₹ ₹ 10,110 x 12 = 1,21,320/- ₹ Deduction (-) ½ = 56,760/- ₹ per annum (-) ½ = 60,660/- ₹ per annum Future prospects 40% of 56,760/-is ₹ ₹ 22704, total comes to 79,464/- ₹ 40% of 60,660/- is ₹ ₹24,264/-,total comes to 84,924/- ₹ Multiplier (x) 18 = 14,30,352/- ₹ (x) 18 = 15,28,632/- ₹ Funeral Expenses ₹ 16,500/- , 16,500/- ₹ Loss of Estate ₹ 16,500/- ₹ 16,500/- Loss of Parental Consortium ₹ 44,000/- 44,000 x 2 = ₹ 88,000/- ₹ Total ₹ 15,07,352/- ₹ 16,49,632/- 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 6 10. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of 15,07,352/- ₹ awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to 16,49,632/- ₹ . Hence, after deducting the amount of 15,07,352/- ₹ , the appellants are held entitled for an additional amount of 1,42,280/- ₹ . The concerned respondent is directed to deposit the amount of compensation as enhanced by this Court within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of claim application before the Tribunal i.e. 22.06.2021 till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. 11. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. The deposit Tribunal shall pass appropriate order with regard to apportionment, investment and disbursement of the enhanced amount of compensation. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Ashok