1 2025:CGHC:37302 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 387 of 2022 1 - Smt. Tanuja Bai W/o Gaurishankar Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Dumarkachhar Tahsil And P.S. Pali District Korba (Chhattisgarh) 2 - Gaurishankar Maravi S/o Ramnarayan Singh Aged About 42 Years R/o Village Dumarkachhar Tahsil And P.S. Pali District Korba (Chhattisgarh) ... Appellant(s) versus 1 - Satyanarayan Neti S/o Bhagbali Neti, Aged About 34 Years R/o. Binjharapara Baksahi P.S. Pali District Korba (Chhattisgarh)..........(Driver Cum Owner Of The Vehicle) 2 - I.C.I.C.I. Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd., Through Branch Manager, Office At 2nd Floor Simur Tower L.I.C. Bhawan Pandari Raipur (Chhattisgarh).............(Insurer) ... Respondent(s) For Appellant(s) : Mr. Vikas Patel on behalf of Mr. P.K. Tulsyan, Advocate For Respondent No.2 : Mr. Suraj Patel on behalf of Mr. Shobhit Mishra, Advocate SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment On Board HARNEET KAUR Digitally signed by HARNEET KAUR Date: 2025.08.05 11:02:22 +0530 2 30.07.2025 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 20.10.2021 passed by learned 1st Additional Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Katghora, District- Korba (C.G.) in Claim Case No. 96/2019, whereby learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs. 11,28,000/- as compensation for the death of Prem Kumar Maravi, aged about 19 years, who worked as computer operator. 2. Facts of the case relevant for disposal of this appeal are that on 17.07.2019, while the deceased late Prem Kumar Maravi was riding the motor cycle, when he reached near Ramayan Singh House at the same time, the questioned vehicle came which was driven by the respondent No.1 in rash and negligent manner and dashed to the deceased therefore deceased sustained severe injuries on the various part of body and he died during the treatment. Matter was reported to the concerned Police Station thereon a criminal case has been registered against the respondent No.1 and charge-sheet has been filed before the concerned court. 3 3. Appellants, who are parents of the deceased, filed an application under Section 166 read with Section 140 of the Act of 1988 seeking compensation to the tune of Rs. 27,50,000/- pleading therein that at the time of the incident, deceased was aged about 19 years and was an able-bodied person and used to work as a computer operator and earned Rs. 15,000/- per month. 4. Respondent No.1 i.e. driver of the offending vehicle remained ex-party. 5. Respondent No. 2 i.e. the Insurance Company opposed the claim application and submitted that on the date of accident, respondent No. 1 did not have valid driving license and the motorcycle was being plied in breach of the terms and conditions of Insurance policy, therefore, they are not liable for payment of compensation. 6. Learned Claims Tribunal, upon appreciation of pleadings and evidence placed on record by respective parties, held that deceased rem Kumar Maravi died in the accident arising out of rash and negligent driving of the aforesaid offending vehicle which was driven by respondent No. 1. Breach of conditions of insurance policy was not found proven, and contributory negligence on the part of the deceased was also not found proven and after calculating the amount of compensation, awarded Rs. 11,28,400/- as 4 total compensation with interest @ 6 % p.a. from the date of filing of claim application. 7. Learned counsel for the appellants would submit that learned Claims Tribunal has erred in awarding less amount of compensation in the facts of the case. Claims Tribunal erred in assessing income of deceased as Rs. 7,000/- per month which should be Rs. 8,400/- per month and moreover, Rs. 56,000/- should additionally be awarded under loss of consortium therefore, the instant appeal be allowed and the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal may suitably be enhanced. 8. Learned counsel for respondent No. 2 would submit that the appellants have failed to prove nature of occupation and 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. 9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection. 10. Learned Claims Tribunal assessed the monthly income of deceased Prem Kumar Maravi to be Rs. 7,000/-, however, 5 in the opinion of this Court, the monthly income of the deceased should be Rs. 8,400/- (as per minimum wages prescribed at relevant time) and Rs. 1,00,800/- per annum as he worked as a computer operator. 11. 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:- Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1. Income Rs. 7,000/- x 12 = Rs. 84,000/- Rs. 8,400 x 12 = Rs. 1,00,800/- 2. Future Prospect (+) 40% i.e. Rs. 33,600 = Rs. 1,17,600/- (+) 40% i.e. Rs. 40,320 = Rs. 1,41,120/- 3. Deduction (-) ½ i.e. Rs. 58,800/- = Rs. 58,800/- (-) ½ i.e. Rs. 70,560/- =Rs. 70,560/- 4. Multiplier (x) 18 = Rs. 10.58,400/- (x) 18 = Rs. 12,70,080/- 5. Loss of Consortium Rs. 30,000/- Rs. 36,000/- 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 6 6. Love and affection Rs. 40,000/- Rs.96,000/- Total Rs. 11,28,400/- Rs. 14,02,080/- 12. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs. 11,28,400/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 14,02,080/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs. 11,28,400/-, the appellants are held entitled for an additional amount of Rs. 2,73,680/-. The Respondents are directed to deposit the amount of compensation as enhanced by this Court within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of claim application before the Tribunal i.e. 05.09.2019 till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. 13. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed in part 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 Harneet