1 2025:CGHC:21969 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 848 of 2020 1. Rajesh Chhabra S/o Late Jagatram Aged About 49 Years R/o Dayalband Punjabi Colony Tehsil And District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 2. Smt. Varsha Chhabra W/o Rajesh Aged About 46 Years R/o Dayalband Punjabi Colony Tehsil And District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 3. Sakshi Chhabra D/o Rajesh Aged About 19 Years R/o Dayalband Punjabi Colony Tehsil And District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Appellants/ Claimants versus 1. Sharad Ganbir S/o Hemchand Ganbir Aged About 42 Years Resident No. L.I.G.D. - 104 Tarbahar Bilaspur, Tehsil And District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, (Driver of the vehicle No. CG/10/V/4614) 2. Smt. Urvashi Kaushik S/o Shri Shiv Shankar Kaushik R/o Ajaz Chouk Mangla Bilaspur, Tehsil And District Bilaspur, (Owner of the Vehicle No. CG/10/V/4614), 3. Branch Manager The New India Assurance Com Ltd Rajive Plaza, Near Old Bus Stand Bilaspur Tehsil And District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, (Insurer Of The Vehicle No. C.G./10/v/4614). 2 ... Respondents For Appellants : Ms. Aditi Diwan, Advocate For Respondent No.1 : Mr. Aditya Kumar Mishra, Advocate For Respondent No.3 : Ms. Swati Agrawal, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order On Board 08/05/2025 1. With the consent of the parties, the appeal is being heard finally. 2. Appellants-claimants have filed this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the learned 8th Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur (for short ‘the Claims Tribunal’) vide award dated 23.1.2020 passed in Claim Case No.709/2018. 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that on 22.4.2018 when Suyash Chhabra was going to Link Road from Dayalband Bilaspur, on the way, one Scorpio vehicle bearing registration number CG10-V-4614 (for short ‘offending vehicle’), driven by non- applicant No.1 in a high speed and negligent manner, dashed Suyash Chhabra as a result he sustained grievous injuries on his head, nose, face, chest and other parts. He was immediately taken to Apollo Hospital, Bilaspur for treatment. Looking to critical condition of Suyash, he was admitted in Ramkrishna Hospital, Raipur on 23.4.20218 where during 3 course of treatment he succumbed to injuries on 27.4.2018. Report of accident was lodged in Police Station Tarbahar, Bilaspur based on which Crime bearing No.122/2018 was registered for alleged offences punishable under Sections 279, 337 & 304A of IPC. 4. Claimants/ appellants herein, who are parents and sister of deceased, filed an application claiming compensation to the tune of Rs.71,40,000/- under various heads on the ground that on the date of accident, deceased was 23 years of age, he was earning Rs.25,000/- per month by doing work of building interior and Rs.5,000/- by working in the shop of his father situated in Budhwari Bazar, Bilaspur. They were dependent on earning of deceased and on account of his death in road accident, they have suffered loss of income. 5. Non-applicant No.1 submitted reply to application and denied the pleadings made therein. It was pleaded that burden to prove occupation and income of deceased was on claimants. At the time of accident, non-applicant No.1 was driving offending vehicle in normal speed, deceased came in front of his vehicle all of a sudden, which was the cause of accident. Non-applicant No.1 has purchased the offending vehicle on 7.6.2017 from non-applicant No.2, but till the date of accident the same could not be transferred in the name of non-applicant 4 No.1. The claimants have sought exaggerated compensation. On the date of accident, the offending vehicle was insured with non-applicant No.3, therefore, insurance company is liable to indemnify the insured. 6. Non-applicant No.2 also filed reply to application and denied all the averments made therein. It was pleaded that the offending vehicle has been sold by her to non-applicant No.1 and as such, non-applicant No.2 was not the owner of offending vehicle on the date of accident. 7. Non-applicant No.3- Insurance Company submitted its reply denying the averments made in application. Insurance of offending vehicle is denied for want of verification of insurance policy. It was also pleaded that information regarding accident was not given to insurance company and even the papers relating to offending vehicle like RC book, permit, fitness certificate, insurance policy, driving license etc. have not been got verified. At the time of accident, non-applicant No.1 was not possessing valid and effective driving license and the offending vehicle was used for commercial purpose, which was in violation of conditions of insurance policy. Under these circumstances, the insurance company is not liable to indemnify the insured. 8. The Claims Tribunal after appreciating the pleadings and 5 evidence placed on record (oral and documentary both) by the respective parties has arrived at a conclusion that accident was the result of rash and negligent driving of non-applicant No.1-driver; there was no breach of any condition of insurance policy. Accordingly, the Claims Tribunal partly allowed claim application and awarded compensation of Rs.15,36,503/- along with interest @ 6% p.a. 9. Learned counsel for the claimants/appellants submits that the appellants in their application as also evidence have specifically stated that deceased was earning Rs.25,000/- per month by doing work of building interior, however, the Claims Tribunal has assessed monthly income of deceased at Rs.8,620/- notionally on the ground that claimants did not produce any concrete evidence establishing occupation and income of deceased. She submits that a person doing work of Building Interior cannot be equated with an ordinary labour, who can even be an uneducated person, for the purpose of assessing income. She further submits that the claimants have handed over B.Com. 1st and 2nd year mark sheets of deceased to the counsel, which are also part of the record as unexhibited documents. From the mark sheets it is appearing that deceased was a graduate and therefore, even the notional income of the deceased cannot be less than minimum wages 6 payable to an skilled labour under the Minimum Wages Act 1948. She further submits that the Claims Tribunal has not awarded any amount towards loss of consortium. Hence, she prays that the amount of compensation awarded to appellants be enhanced suitably. 10. On the other hand, learned counsel for respective respondents opposes submissions of learned counsel for appellants and submit that in absence of any clinching evidence brought on record by claimants, the Claims Tribunal was justified in assessing income of deceased on notional basis. The award passed by the Claims Tribunal is just and proper, which does not call for any interference. 11. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the Claims Tribunal. 12. Perusal of the record would show that apart from exhibited documents, unexhibited documents are also available in record. Unexhibited documents contain two mark sheets of deceased i.e. of B. Com. 1st year and 2nd year. PAN card of deceased is also available at Page No.24 of unexhibited documents, which shows that deceased was also registered with the Income Tax Department. Award of compensation in motor accident cases under the Act of 1988 is in the form of social welfare. The Act of 1988 is a beneficial piece of legislation, therefore, for 7 awarding compensation to the family members of deceased, the Court has to assess compensation with a broader approach. Compensation should be just considering facts of each case. Straight jacket formula cannot be applied. Sometimes some guess work has to be done for assessing income of deceased. 13. In case at hand, it is true that the claimants failed to prove the occupation and income of deceased as pleaded in application by producing clinching evidence, hence, the Claims Tribunal justified in adopting procedure for assessing income of deceased on notional basis. However, the Courts/Tribunals while assessing income on national basis has to keep in mind the educational qualification of the deceased, wage prevailing, price index, cost of living and wage rate notified by the competent authority under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948. Though the documents relating to educational qualification of deceased are not exhibited on behalf of claimants, but mark sheets of B.Com. 1st year & 2nd year as also PAN card of deceased available in record as un-exhibited documents. A labourer may be an uneducated person and therefore in the facts and circumstances of the case, where claimants have produced mark sheets of B.Com. 1st year & 2nd year as also PAN card of deceased, I find it appropriate to assess income of 8 the deceased as Rs.10,000/- in place of Rs.8,620/- as assessed by the Claims Tribunal. It is ordered accordingly. 14. Impugned award reveals that while computing the compensation the Claims Tribunal has not awarded anything for loss of consortium. In case of Magma General Insurance Company Limited versus Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram and others, reported in (2018) 18 SCC 130, Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that the husband, widow, children and parents each are entitled for Rs,40,000/- towards loss of consortium. In case at hand, there is no dispute that appellant No.1 and 2 are parents of deceased who died in a road accident and therefore, they are entitled for Rs.40,000/- each towards loss of filial consortium. It is ordered accordingly. However, appellant No.3 being sister of the deceased is not entitled to any compensation under the head ‘loss of consortium’. 15. As regards compensation for loss of love and affection, the Claims Tribunal was not justified in awarding compensation under the aforesaid head for the reason that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Satinder Kaur alias Satwinder Kaur and others, (2021) 11 SCC 780, has held that “loss of love and affection‟ is comprehended in loss of consortium and there is no justification to award compensation towards loss of love and affection under a 9 separate head. Similarly, in addition to the compensation for monetary loss, separate compensation to appellants on ground of mental agony should not have been awarded. There cannot be award of any compensation towards mental agony for the death of the son. Therefore, the amount awarded under the heads of love and affection, mental shock and agony cannot be sustained and the same is to be reduced. It is ordered accordingly. 16. The Claims Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.1,83,159/- towards medical expenses based upon the documents brought on record by the claimants, therefore, the same does not calls for any interference. 17. For the foregoing, this Court proposes to recalculate amount of compensation payable to the claimants/appellants. 18. Accordingly, income of deceased is taken as Rs.10,000/- per month and thus annual income of deceased comes to Rs.1,20,000/-. After adding 40% towards future prospects, the total income of deceased comes to Rs.168000/-. Since the deceased was bachelor at the time of accident, one-half is to be deducted towards his personal expenses. After deducting one- half, annual dependency would come to Rs.84000/-. Applying multiplier of 18, as applied by Claims Tribunal, the loss of dependency would be Rs.15,12,000/- (84000x18). Besides 10 this, appellant No.1 & 2 are entitled for a sum of Rs.40,000/- each towards spousal consortium i.e. Rs.80,000/-, as held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matters of Nanu Ram @ Chuharu Ram (supra). In addition to aforesaid amount, appellants are entitled to get a sum of Rs.15,000/- for funeral expenses and Rs.15,000/- for loss of estate. Thus, total amount of compensation comes to Rs.18,05,159/- (15,12,000 + 1,83,159+ 40000 + 40000 + 15000 + 15000). This amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 7.5% p.a. from the date of application till actual payment is made. Rest of the conditions mentioned in the impugned award shall remain intact. Any amount disbursed to appellant pursuant to impugned award shall be adjusted. 19.In the result, the appeal is allowed in part and the impugned award stands modified to the extent indicated above. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge roshan/- SYED ROSHAN ZAMIR ALI Digitally signed by SYED ROSHAN ZAMIR ALI