1 2025:CGHC:38161 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 823 of 2022 1 - Smt. Sarita Bai, W/o. Chandrika Prasad, Caste Satnami, Aged About 41 Years, R/o. Village Rawanguda, Post Seonikala, Tahsil Kurud, District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Chandrika Prasad, S/o. Late Pardeshiram, Caste Satnami, Aged About 43 Years, R/o. Village Rawanguda, Post Seonikala, Tahsil Kurud, District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. 3 – Ragini, D/o. Chandrika Prasad, Caste Satnami, Aged About 14 Years, Through Natural Guardian Chandrika Prasad, S/o. Late Pardeshiram, Caste Satnami, R/o. Village Rawanguda, Post Seonikala, Tahsil Kurud, District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Kushboo Satnami, D/o. Chandrika Prasad, Aged About 10 Years, Caste Satnami, Through Natural Guardian Chandrika Prasad, S/o. Late Pardeshiram, Caste Satnami, R/o. Village Rawanguda, Post Seonikala, Tahsil Kurud, District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. 5 – Kiran, D/o. Chandrika Prasad, Aged About 18 Years, Caste Satnami, R/o. Village Rawanguda, Post Seonikala, Tahsil Kurud, District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellants versus 1 - Rekhraj Singh, S/o. Doman Singh Dahariya, Caste Satnami, Aged About 30 Years, R/o. Seonikala, Post Seonikala, Tahsil Kurud, Dsitrict Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. ASHOK SAHU Digitally signed by ASHOK SAHU Date: 2025.08.04 17:55:49 +0530 2 2 - The Branch Manager, Tata A.I.G. General Insurance Company Limited Corporate Park, Plot No.1, Block No. 9, Office No.403, 4th Floor, Rajbanda Maidan, Raipur, Post Raipur, Tahsil And District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Smt. Bharti, W/o. Bhaiya Lal Ghoghre, Caste Satnami, Aged About 22 Years, R/o. Village Rawanguda, Post Seonikala, Tahsil Kurud, District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh. Presently Residing At Village- Koankera, Post-Rajim, Thana-Rajim, District Gariya- band, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Appellants : Mr. Arjun Lal Singroul, Advocate For Respondent No.2. : Mr. Sourabh Gupta, Advocate (Single Bench) Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment on Board 01/08/2025 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 amount of compensation, challenging the impugned award dated 11.02.2022 passed by learned Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Link Court Kurud, District Dhamtari in Claim Case No.06/2021, whereby the learned Claims Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs. 15,63,074/- as compensation for the death of Goutam Gayakwad, who was 3 Painter, aged about 22 years taking into consideration the monthly income of Rs.6,000/- per month as unskilled labour. 2. Mr. Arjun Lal Singroul, learned counsel for the appellants would submit that the learned Claims Tribunal has held the income of the deceased only Rs. 6,000/- per month, which is very lower side, as even if it is assumed that the deceased was unskilled labour, his monthly income as per Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the office of the Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh should be taken as Rs.9,120/-. Therefore, the instant appeal may be allowed and the amount of compensation be enhanced suitably. 3. Mr. Sourabh Gupta, learned counsel for the respondent No.2/ insurance company would support the impugned award and submits that the appellants have failed to prove 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. He further submits that the amount of compensation awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal is just and proper, which does not call for any interference. 4 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and gone through the records minutely. 5. Learned Claims Tribunal has assessed the monthly income of deceased Goutam Gayakwad to be Rs. 6000/- 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. 9,120/- (as per minimum wages prescribed at relevant time), which comes to Rs. 1,09,440/- per annum. 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 & 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. 6000 x 12 = Rs. 72,000/- Rs. 9,120 x 12 = Rs. 1,09,440/- 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 5 Future prospects Add(+) 40% i.e. 28,800/- = Rs. 1,00,800/- Add(+) 40% i.e. 43,776/- = Rs. 1,53,216/- Deduction Less (-) 1/4 i.e. 25,200/- = Rs.75,600/- Less (-) 1/4 i.e. 38,304/- = Rs. 1,14,912/- Multiplier (x) 18 = Rs. 13,60,800/- (x) 18 = Rs. 20,68,416/- Medical Bills Rs.1,26,074/- Rs.1,26,074/- Funeral Expenses Rs. 16,500/- Rs. 16,500/- Loss of Estate Rs. 16,500/- Rs. 16,500/- Loss of Consortium for Claimant No.1 Rs. 44,000/- Rs. 44,0000/- Loss of Consortium for Claimants No.2 to 6 Not assessed Rs. 40,000/- x 5 = Rs. 2,00,000/- Total Rs. 15,63,074/- Rs. 24,71,490/- 7. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs. 15,63,074/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 24,71,490/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs. 15,63,074/-, the appellants are entitled for an additional amount of Rs. 9,08,416/-. The concerned respondent is directed to deposit 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 6 application before the Tribunal 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 Ashok