1 2025:CGHC:48822 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 48 of 2022 Roop Charan Gond S/o Laxman Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Karichhapar Village Panchayat Juhli Police Station Seepat Bilaspur Present Address Village Sondripali Tahsil And Police Station Pali District Korba Chhattisgarh., District : Korba, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus 1 - Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd. Through - Branch Manager, Office At Plot No.1, Fourth Floor Maruti Heights Behind R.K. Mall G.E. Road Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh (Insurance Co.), District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Rohit Das S/o Jeevan Das R/o. Village Hindadih Post Gudi Tahsil Masturi District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh (Driver Of The Vehicle) 3 - Ishtiyaque Malik S/o Mohd. Sohail Ahmad R/o. H.No.209 Kalindi Kunj Kabir Chowk Raigarh District Raigarh Chhattisgarh (Owner Of The Vehicle) ... Respondent(s) For Appellant : Mr. Vikas Patel on behalf of Mr. P.K. Tulsyan, Advocate For Respondent No. 1 : Mr. Utsav Mahiswar, Advocate HARNEET KAUR Digitally signed by HARNEET KAUR Date: 2025.09.24 11:01:57 +0530 2 SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment On Board 23.09.2025 1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “Act of 1988”) has been preferred by the appellant/claimant seeking enhancement of amount of compensation, challenging the impugned award dated 07/09/2021 passed by learned 1st Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Katghora, District Korba (C.G.) in Claim Case No. 97/2019, whereby learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs. 13,14,756/- as compensation for the injuries suffered by him. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant/claimant would submit that on account of the accident, appellant’s right leg has been amputated above the knee and the trial Court, relying upon the permanent disability certificate (Ex. P/50) in which it has been mentioned that appellant has suffered 80% permanent disability, the Claims Tribunal has proceeded to assess the loss of earning capacity as 75%, which ought to have been 100%, as such, the amount of compensation may suitably be enhanced. 3. Learned counsel for respondent No. 1 would support the impugned award and submit that the compensation 3 awarded by learned Claims Tribunal is just and proper and does not warrant any interference by this Court. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection. 5. A careful perusal of the record would show that the Claims Tribunal has assessed the monthly income of deceased to be Rs. 7,000/-, however, 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 for unskilled labourer) and Rs. 1,00,800/- per annum. Moreover, in view of the permanent disability certificate (Ex. P/50) which shows that appellant has suffered 80% permanent disability which has been duly proved by Dr. Ghanshyam Diwan (PW-3) who has admitted that appellant’s right leg has been amputated above the knee, the Claims Tribunal has erred in holding that his loss of earning capacity would be 75% and in my considered opinion, it ought to be 100%. 6. 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 & 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 4 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. Loss of earning capacity 75% i.e. Rs. 63,000/- 100% i.e. Rs. 1,00,800/- 3. Multiplier (x) 14 = Rs. 8,82,000/- (x) 14 = Rs. 14,11,200/- 4. Future Prospect (+) 25% i.e. Rs. 2,20,500/- = Rs. 11,02,500/- (+) 25% i.e. Rs. 3,52,800/- = Rs. 17,64,000/- 5. Medical Expenses Rs. 1,42,256/- Rs. 1,42,256/- 6. Pain and Suffering Rs. 20,000/- Rs. 50,000/- 7. Loss of amenities Rs. 20,000/- Rs. 40,000/- 8. Special Diet Rs. 10,000/- Rs. 20,000/- 9. Travelling Expenses Rs. 10,000/- Rs. 20,000/- 10. Attendant fee Rs. 10,000/- Rs. 20,000/- 11. Cost of Prosthesis (Artificial leg) Nil Rs. 1,00,000/- Total Rs. 13,14,756/- Rs. 21,46,256/- 7. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs. 13,14,756/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 21,46,256/-. Hence, the appellant is held entitled for an additional amount of Rs. 8,31,500/-. Respondent No. 1 is directed to deposit 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 5 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 @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of claim application before the Tribunal i.e. 06/09/2019 till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. 8. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed in part and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Harneet