1 2025:CGHC:50335 NAFR HIGH COURT of CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 845 of 2024 1 - Samina Khatoon, Shri Mohammad Mumtaz Khan, Aged About 51 Years R/o Vidya Utkarsh Vidyalaya Shiv Nagar Snatoshi Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Mohammad Mumtaz Khan S/o Late Rehmat Hussain Khan Aged About 56 Years R/o Vidya Utkarsh Vidyalaya Shiv Nagar Snatoshi Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellants versus 1 - Kalandi Chandra Hati S/o S. C. Hati Aged About 37 Years R/o Plant Side Road Rourkela, District - Sundargarh (Odisha). (Driver of The offending Vehicle Crane No. N. L. 2 N- 7736). 2 - Akshay Jain S/o Niyalchand Jain Aged About 44 Years R/o Malviya Nagar Durg, Chhattisgarh (Owner of The offending Vehicle Crane No. N. L. 2 N- 7736). 3 - The United India Insurance Company Limited Through Divisional Manager, Divisional office No. 01, Krishna Complex, Jail Road Raipur, Tahsil And District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Chhattisgarh (Insurer of The offending Vehicle Crane No. N. L. 2 N- 7736). ... Respondent(s) For Appellants For Respondent No.2 : : Ms. Shalini Jangde, Advocate, holding the brief of Mr. Arjun Lal Singroul, Advocate Mr. Manoj Kumar Yadav, on behalf of Mr. Lukesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate For Insurance Company : Mr. Anupam Dubey, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment on Board 2 09/10/2025 1. The claimants/appellants have preferred this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation against the award dated 15.02.2024 passed by the learned II nd Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur, in Claim Case No. 484/2019, whereby compensation of Rs. 10,28,200/- with interest @ 7% per annum was granted on account of death of Faiyyaz Khan in a motor accident. 2. Brief facts of the present case are that on 21.01.2019 at about 6:30 PM, the deceased Faiyyaz Khan was walking on the raod near Jadeshwar Chimni and at that point of time, the offending vehicle bearing Registration No. NL-2N-7736, driven rashly and negligently by respondent No.1/Kalandi Chandra Hati, collided with a fence and the vehicle got turned turtle over the deceased. As a result, the deceased sustained grievous injuries and he was taken to Devgarh Hospital, where he was declared dead. An FIR under Sections 279, 337, and 304A of IPC was registered against the driver. The claimants, who are parents of the deceased, filed a claim application seeking compensation to the tune of Rs.20,00,000/-. They pleaded that the deceased was 18 years old, earning Rs. 8,000/- per month. The respondents denied the averments made in the claim application, thereafter the learned Tribunal after appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, awarded compensation to the tune of Rs. 10,28,200/-. 3 3. Ms. Jangde, learned counsel appearing for the appellants/claimants would submit that the learned Tribunal considered the income of the deceased to the tune of 6000, whereas according to the minimum ₹ wages matrix, the minimum wage payable to an unskilled laborer in the month of January 2019 was 8140 per month. She would further ₹ submit that on other heads the learned Tribunal has granted just and proper compensation; thus, she would pray to enhance the compensation. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondent(s) would appose the submission made by learned counsel for the appellants and submit that the learned Tribunal has awarded just & proper compensation. It is submitted that the claimants failed to prove the income of the deceased. It is contended that this appeal deserves to be dismissed. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6. Admittedly, age of the deceased was 18 years at the time of accident. The learned Tribunal assessed monthly income of the deceased at Rs. 6,000/- but as per the Minimum Wages matrix, the monthly wages for an unskilled labourer was Rs. 8,140/- for the month of January, 2019, hence, the notional income of the deceased requires reconsideration. 7. Considering the above discussed facts, the computation of compensation is revisited as under:- 4 Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded by Tribunal Compensation awarded by this COurt 1. Income Rs. 6,000 x 12 = Rs.72,000/- Rs. 8,140 x 12 = Rs. 97,680 /- 2. Future Prospect 40 % + 28,800 = Rs. 1,00,800 40% + 39,072 = Rs. 1,36,752/- 3. Deduction (-) 1/2 Rs.50,400/- (-) 1/2 = Rs. 68,376/- 4. Multiplier (x) 18 = Rs.9,07,200/- (x) 18 = Rs.12,30,768/- 5. Loss of Estate Rs. 16,500/- Rs. 16,500/- 6. Funeral expenses Rs. 16,500/- Rs. 16,500/- 7. Loss of Consortium Rs. 44,000x2 = 88,000/- Rs. 44,000x2 = 88,000/- 8. TOTAL Rs.10,28,200/- Rs. 13,51,768/- Thus, after revisiting the computation, the total payable compensation comes to Rs. 13,51,768/-. Since the learned Tribunal has already awarded Rs. 10,28,200/-, the claimants shall be entitled to an enhanced compensation of Rs. 3,23,568/-, in addition to the amount already awarded with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realization. 8. Insurance Company/respondent No.3 is directed to satisfy the award first and shall be entitled to recover the award amount from the owner and driver of the offending vehicle, in accordance with law. 9. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part. The award dated 15.02.2024 is modified to the extent indicated hereinabove. Sd/- Rakesh Mohan Pandey JUDGE Nadim