1 (MAC No. 417 of 2022) 2025:CGHC:49405 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 417 of 2022 1 - Balman Baghel S/o Neerdhar Baghel Aged About 50 Years R/o Village - Kesarpal, Matagudi Para, Post Kesarpal, P.S. Bhanpuri, District : Bastar (Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh 2 - Jhaalin Baghel W/o Balman Baghel Aged About 45 Years R/o Village - Kesarpal, Matagudi Para, Post Kesarpal, P.S. Bhanpuri, District Bastar (Chhattisgarh) --- Appellant(s) versus 1 - Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company Limited Through Branch Manager, Office At Shop No. 205, Second Floor M.S. Silver Plaza, Mahaveer Nagar Ring Road No. 01, Raipur District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) (Insurance Co.) 2 - Yogesh Kashyap (Died And Deleted) In Compliance Of Honble Court Order Dated 15-03-2023 3 - Heeralal Kashyap S/o Ishwar Kashyap R/o Village - Khaaspara, Joba, Post Joba, P. Pakhnakongra, P.S. Bhanpuri, Tahsil Bastar, District Bastar (Chhattisgarh) (Owner Of The Vehicle) --- Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from the Case Information System) For Appellants :- Mr. P.K. Tulsyan and Mr. Vikas Patel, Advocates For Respondent No.1 :- Mr. P.R. Patankar, Advocate ADITI DIWAN KAIWART Digitally signed by ADITI DIWAN KAIWART Date: 2025.09.26 13:02:25 +0530 2 (MAC No. 417 of 2022) SB - Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment on Board 26.09.2025 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 the amount of compensation, challenging the impugned award dated 23.12.2021 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bastar (Jagdalpur), District Bastar, Chhattisgarh in Claim Case No.54/2020, whereby an amount of Rs. 13,27,984/- has been awarded as compensation for death of Parmeshwar Baghel, who was working as labourer, aged about 24 years, at the time of incident. 2. Appellants, who are parents of deceased Parmeshwar Baghel, 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.27,60,000/- pleading therein that on the date of accident, deceased Parmeshwar Baghel, was aged about 24 years and was sole bread earner of the family and on account of his untimely death in the accident, the appellants have suffered economical and psychological difficulties. 3 (MAC No. 417 of 2022) 3. Learned Claims Tribunal, upon appreciation of pleadings and evidence placed on record by the respective parties, held that deceased Parmeshwar Baghel died in the accident caused due to negligent and rash driving of offending vehicle, insured by respondent No.1 and since breach of conditions of insurance policy was not found to be proved, fastened the liability upon the insurance company to pay the amount of compensation and after calculation, the learned Claims Tribunal awarded Rs. 13,27,984/- as total compensation with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of claim application. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants would submit that learned Claims Tribunal has awarded very meager amount, as the Claims Tribunal erred in assessing income of the deceased as Rs.8,320/- per month, whereas the deceased used to earn Rs.10,000/- per month while working as labourer. Moreover, the amount under other heads also are on the lower side and liable to be enhanced. Therefore, the instant appeal be allowed and the amount of compensation awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal be suitably enhanced. 5. Learned counsel for the insurance company/respondent No.1 would submit that the appellants have failed to prove 4 (MAC No. 417 of 2022) the exact income of deceased by producing clinching and admissible piece of evidence, hence, the learned Claims Tribunal is justified in assessing income of deceased on notional basis. The amount of compensation awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal is just and proper, which does not call for any interference. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and gone through the records with utmost circumspection. 7. Learned Claims Tribunal assessed the monthly income of deceased Parmeshwar Baghel to be Rs.8,320/- per month, however, in the opinion of this Court, as per the Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the office of Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh for unskilled labour, the monthly income of the deceased should be Rs.8,600/- per month, which comes to Rs. 1,03,200/- per annum. 8. 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 Sethi1, Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 5 (MAC No. 417 of 2022) 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 Rs. 8,320/- x 12 = Rs.99,840/- Rs. 8,600/-x 12 = Rs.1,03,200/- Future prospects @ 40% Rs. 99,840 + 39,936 = Rs.1,39,776/- Rs.1,03,200 + 41,280 = Rs.1,44,480/- Deduction of 1/2 Rs.1,39,776 – 69,888 = Rs.69,888/- Rs.1,44,480 – 72,240 = Rs.72,240/- Multiplier of 18 Rs. 69,888 x 18 = Rs.12,57,984/- Rs. 72,240 x 18 = Rs.13,00,320/- Loss of Estate Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 16,500/- Funeral Expenses Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 16,500/- Loss of Spousal, parental Consortium Rs. 20,000 x 2 = Rs. 40,000/- Rs. 44,000 x 2 = Rs. 88,000/- Total Rs. 13,27,984/- Rs. 14,21,320/- 9. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs. 13,27,984/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 14,21,320/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs. 13,27,984/-, the appellants are entitled for an additional amount of Rs.93,336/-. The 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 6 (MAC No. 417 of 2022) concerned respondent is directed to deposit the amount of compensation as enhanced by this Court within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of claim application before the Tribunal till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. 10. Accordingly, this appeal is partly allowed and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. 11. Let a certified copy of this order be transmitted to the concerned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal for necessary information and action, if any. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge @d!t!