1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 690 of 2018 1 - Smt. Rupa Gupta W/o Late Virendra Gupta Aged About 28 Years Occupation House Wife, R/o Ward No.26 Sattipara Ambikapur Nagar, P.S. And Tahsil Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh. 2 - Mayank Gupta S/o Late Virendra Gupta Aged About 5 Years Occupation Student, Minor Through Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Rupa Gupta, R/o Ward No.26 Sattipara Ambikapur Nagar, P.S. And Tahsil Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh. 3 - Smt. Gaura Devi W/o Late Ishwar Dayal Gupta Aged About 49 Years Occupation House Wife, R/o Ward No.26 Sattipara Ambikapur Nagar, P.S. And Tahsil Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh (Claimants), District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh. --- Appellant(s) versus Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 1 - Somnath Sahu S/o Late Govind Ram Sahu Aged About 44 Years R/o Simga (Phokatpara) P.S. Simga, District Balodabazar, Chhattisgarh (Driver/owner), District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Branch Manager New India Insurance Company Ltd. Branch Office Raipur Bilaspur Road Simga District Balodabazar, Chhattisgarh, Through Divisional Manager New India Insurance Company Ltd. Sada Complex, T.P.Nagar Korba, District Korba, Chhattisgarh (Insurer), District : Korba, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) For Appellant(s) : Mr. Shubham Tiwari, Advocate on behalf of Mr. A.N. Pandey, Advocate. For Respondent(s) No. 1 : None For Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Piyush Gupta, Advocate on behalf of Mr. B.N. Nande, Advocate. MAC No. 650 of 2018 1 - Branch Manager, The New India Insurance Company Limited Branch Office, Raipur Bilaspur Road, Simga P.S. Simga District Baloudabazar, Chhattisgarh, Through Divisional Manager The New India Insurance Company Limited Sada Complex, T.P.Nagar Korba, District Korba, Chhattisgarh, Through Authorised Singnatory The New India Assurance (Insurance) Company Limited Bilaspur, Division Office 2nd Floor Rama Trade Center, Above Axix Bank, Opposite Rajiv Plaza, Old Bus Stand Road Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur, 3 Chhattisgarh. ---Appellant(s) Versus 1 - Smt. Rupa Gupta Wd/o Late Virendra Gupta Aged About 28 Years R/o Ward No.26, Sattipara Ambikapur City Police Station And Tehsil Ambikapur, District Ambikapur, Chhattisgarh, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh. 2 - Minor Mayank Gupta S/o Late Virendra Gupta Aged About 5 Years Through Guardian Natural Mother Smt. Rupa Gupta Wd/o Late Virendra Gupta, R/o Ward No.26, Sattipara Ambikapur City Police Station And Tehsil Ambikapur, District Ambikapur, Chhattisgarh, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh. 3 - Smt. Gaura Devi Wd/o Late Ishwar Dayal Gupta Aged About 49 Years R/o Ward No.26, Sattipara Ambikapur City Police Station And Tehsil Ambikapur, District Ambikapur, Chhattisgarh (Claimants), District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh. 4 - Somnath Sahu S/o Govind Ram Sahu Aged About 44 Years R/o Simga (Fokat Para) P.S. Simga District Baloudabazar, Chhattisgarh (Owner-Driver), District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent(s) For Appellant(s) : Mr. Piyush Gupta, Advocate on behalf of Mr. B.N. Nande, Advocate. For Respondent(s) No. 1 : Mr. Shubham Tiwari, Advocate on 4 to 3 behalf of Mr. A.N. Pandey, Advocate. For Respondent No. 4 : None. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 02/07/2025 1. Both the appeals are arising out of one accident, in which one award dated 12.12.2017 has been passed. MAC No. 650 of 2018 is insurer’s appeal and MAC No. 690 of 2018 is claimants’ appeal against the award dated 12.12.2017 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Ambikapur, District- Surguja (C.G.) in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 112/2017. 2. Brief facts of the case, is that, on 20.3.2017, deceased Virendra Kumar Gupta was returning from school to his house at Ambikapur by the motorcycle and when he reached at Charpara the offending vehicle driven by the respondent No. 1 by rash and negligence driving came from opposite side and dashed in the motorcycle due to which deceased received grievous injury and he died on spot The matter was reported before the police station and the police registered the criminal case against the driver of the offending vehicle. The claimants are the legal representative of the deceased, filed an application U/s. 166 of M.V. Act, 1988 for grant of compensation against the respondents on account of 5 death of deceased in the motor accident before the claim tribunal, the respondents filed the reply and denied the pleading of the appellants. The learned claim tribunal after recording the evidence produced by the parties and awarded the compensation of Rs 45,86,560/- in favor of appellants. Being aggrieved by the impugned award the appellants prefer this appeal before this Hon'ble Court for enhancement of the compensation amount. MAC No. 690/2018 3. After considering the evidence and documents brought on record, the tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs. 22,140/- per month i.e. Rs. 2,65,680/- per annum. After adding 50 per cent towards future prospect i.e. Rs. 1,32,840/-, the amount would be Rs. 3,98,520. After deduction of 1/3 of the income i.e. Rs. 1,32,840/- for personal expenses, the annual dependency was taken as Rs. 2,65,680/-. 4. Considering the age of the deceased to be 30 years, the Tribunal applied the multiplier of 17 and calculated the total loss of dependency as Rs. 45,16,560/-. Further Rs. 15,000/- towards funeral expenses, Rs. 40,000/- towards loss of consortium and Rs. 15,000/- towards loss of estate has been awarded. Accordingly, the Claims Tribunal has awarded total compensation of Rs. 45,86,560/- in favour of appellants of the deceased with 6 interest @ 7% per annum, from the date of application till its realization. Hence, this appeal for enhancement. 5. Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants submits that the claims Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 45,86,560/- which is not in accordance with law and the same is required to be enhanced in accordance with law. He further submits that the compensation awarded under other heads is also on lower side and needs to be enhanced. Hence, this appeal may be allowed by enhancing the compensation amount suitably. 6. On the other hand, it has argued on behalf of the counsel for respondent No. 2 that in the facts and circumstances of case, the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is just and proper and requires no further enhancement. 7. None for respondent No. 1. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 9. In a motor accident claim case, what is important is that, the compensation to be awarded by the Courts/Tribunals should be just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the case. It should neither be a meager amount of compensation, nor a Bonanza. 10. Now this Court shall examine as to whether the compensation of awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the 7 given facts and circumstances of the case. 11. As regards the income of the deceased, the Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased at Rs. 22,140/- per month which appears to be proper on the date of accident. Hence, accepting the income of the deceased Rs. 22,140/- per month, the annual income comes to Rs.2,65,680/- per annum. As per National Insurance Company Ltd., Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others, (2017) 16 SCC 680 after adding 50% towards future prospects i.e. Rs. 1,32,840/-, the annual income comes to Rs. 3,98,520/-. 12. Considering the fact that the deceased was aged about 30 years and the appellant/claimants are the wife, son and mother of the deceased so deduction towards personal expenses would be 1/3 (Rs. 1,32,840/-) of the income and after deduction of the same the annual income comes to Rs. 2,65,680/-. In view of judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma (Smt.) and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121 and National Insurance Company Ltd., Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others, (2017) 16 SCC 680 and also considering the age of the deceased, after applying multiplier of 17, the total loss of dependency works out to Rs. 45,16,560/-. The claimants are further entitled for Rs. 18,000/- towards loss of estate (increase of 10% in every three years) and Rs. 18,000/- 8 for funeral expenses (increase of 10% in every three years). As per 'Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nanu, reported in AIR Online 2018 SC 189, the claimants are further entitled for Rs. 40,000/- each (40,000X3+10%+10%) (increase of 10% in every three years) i.e. Rs. 1,44,000/- for consortium. Accordingly, the appellants/claimants (i.e. wife, son and mother) of the deceased would become entitled for total compensation of Rs. 46,96,560/- in the following manner:- S.No. Heads Calculation 01 Towards loss of dependency Rs. 45,16,560/- 02 Towards loss of (40,000X3+10%+10%/-) with an increase of 10% in every three years. Rs. 1,44,000/- 03 Towards loss of estate along with increase of 10% in every three years. Rs. 18,000/- 04 Towards Funeral Expenses along with increase of 10% in every three years. Rs. 18,000/- Total Rs. 46,96,560/- 13. Thus, the total compensation is recomputed as Rs. 46,96,560/-. After deducting Rs. 45,86,560/- as awarded by the tribunal, the enhancement would be Rs. 1,10,000/-. MAC No. 650/2017 9 14. Learned counsel for the appellant/insurance company submits that the he has filed this appeal challenging the liability fastened upon him and it was argued that the driver of the vehicle was not having valid license as such the liability which has been fastened by the learned tribunal against insurance company is not in accordance with law. 15. On the other hand learned counsel for respondents No. 1 to 3 submits that the claims Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 45,86,560/- which is not in accordance with law and the same is required to be enhanced in accordance with law. He further submits that the compensation awarded under other heads is also on lower side and needs to be enhanced. Hence, this appeal may be allowed by enhancing the compensation amount suitably. 16. None for respondent No. 4 i.e. the owner-cum-driver of offending vehicle. 17. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 18. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal has held that the insurance company has failed to prove that the driver of the offending vehicle was not holding a license. The effect in the present case, the insurance company has 10 neither have examined the witnesses nor have filed any documents to substantiate the fact that the vehicle was run in contravention of the insurance policy. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the insurance company is liable to be dismissed, and it is accordingly dismissed. 19. In the result, the appeal filed by the claimants in MAC No. 690/2018 is partly allowed and the appeal filed by the insurance company in MAC No. 650/2018 is hereby dismissed. The claimants/appellants i.e. wife, son and mother of the deceased shall be entitled to Rs. 1,10,000/- (MAC No. 690/2018) in addition to what is already awarded by the claims Tribunal. The enhanced amount will carry interest @ 6% from the date of enhancement of the award till its realization. The impugned award stands modified to the above extent and rest of the conditions shall remain intact. 20. The Registry is further directed to communicate the claimants in writing about “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, State Legal Services Authority and the DLSA of the concerned area where the claimants resides. 11 21. Record of the tribunal be sent back along with copy of this order forthwith for necessary information and action. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat