1 2025:CGHC:50262 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1012 of 2020 1 - Majhan Uraon S/o Jagan Uraon Aged About 40 Years Occupation Labor , R/o Village Saraipara Guturama Post Sitapur Police Station And Tahsil Sitapur District Surguja Chhattisgarh., District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh 2 - Sukunmuni Uraon W/o Majhan Uraon Aged About 37 Years Occupation House Wife , R/o Village Saraipara Guturama Post Sitapur Police Station And Tahsil Sitapur District Surguja Chhattisgarh., District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Babulal Yadav S/o Bechan Yadav Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Durati Post Chandramedha Police Station And Tahsil Pratappur District Surajpur Chhattisgarh. (Driver), District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Smt. Pramila Gupta W/o Uday Gupta Aged About 42 Years R/o Mahadev Gali Ward No. 21 Nagar And Tahsil Ambikapur District Surguja Chhattisgarh. (Owner), District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh 3 - The Branch Manager The New Insurance Company Ltd. Branch Office Near Ambedkar Chowk Ambika Petrol Pump Campus Nagar And Tahsil Ambikapur District Surguja Chhattisgarh. (Insurer), District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Appellants : Ms. Akanksha Vishwakarma, Advocate holding the brief of Shri A.N. Pandey, Advocate. NIRMALA RAO 2 For Respondent No.3 : Ms. Pooja Yadav, Advocate holding the brief of Shri Shivendu Pandya, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 09.10.2025 1. The appellants have filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act seeking enhancement of compensation against the award dated 12.2.2020, passed in Claim Case No.98 of 2019 by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ambikapur, whereby the learned Tribunal passed an award to the tune of Rs.7,50,400/- and directed the Insurance Company to make payment with interest @ 7% per annum on account of death of Sunil Khalkho. 2. The facts of the present case are that Sunil Khalkho, aged about 18 years, was dashed by a Mahendra Pickup bearing registration No. C.G. 15 DF 7509 on 30.5.2018 near Kapiabaina, Main Road. In that accident, Sunil Khalkho sustained injuries and died during the course of treatment on 5.1.2019. The parents of the deceased filed a claim case under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming therein compensation to the tune of Rs.11,68,000/-. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the learned Tribunal has assessed the notional income of the deceased Rs.4,500/- which is at lower side. She would further submit that the learned Tribunal has not awarded compensation for future prospects and loss of consortium. She would pray to enhance the compensation. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent No.3 would oppose the submissions made by counsel for the appellants. She would 3 submit that the learned Tribunal has awarded just and proper compensation. She would contend that the claimants failed to prove the income of the deceased by leading clinching evidence and therefore, the appeal deserves to be dismissed. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents present on the record with utmost circumspection. 6. Admittedly, the age of the deceased was 18 years and he was working as a labourer, as stated by the claimants in the claim application and in their evidence. The Insurance Company could not controvert the pleadings and evidence put forth by the claimants. According to minimum wages matrix applicable in the month of May, 2018, the minimum wages payable to an unskilled labourer was Rs.8,100/-, whereas the learned Tribunal assessed the income at only Rs.4,500/-, which is at lower side. Further, the learned Tribunal has not awarded separate compensation to the parents of the deceased for loss of consortium and awarded only Rs.40,000/- under that head. 7. Considering the above-discussed facts, in my opinion, the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal requires reconsideration and same is being revisited herein below: Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded by Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1. Income Rs. 4,500 x12 = Rs. 54,000/- Rs. 8,100 x 12 = Rs. 97,200/- 2. Future Prospect 40% - 5,400/- (54,000+ 21,600 = 75,600/-) 40% - 38,880/- (97,200 + 38,880 = 1,36,080/-) 3. Deduction (-) 50% (37,800/-) (75,600 – 37,800 = 37,800/- (-) 50% (68,040/-) (i.e. Rs. 1,36,080-68,040) = Rs. 68,040/- 4 4. Multiplier (x) 18 = Rs. (37,800 x 18 = 6,80,400/-) (x) 18 = Rs. (68,040 x 18 = 12,24,720/-) 5. Loss of Estate Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 15,000/- 6. Funeral expenses Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 15,000/- 7. Loss of Consortium Rs.40,000/- Rs.80,000/- TOTAL Rs. 7,50,400/- Rs. 13,34,720/- 8. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs.7,50,400/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.13,34,720/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs.7,50,400/-, the appellants/claimants are entitled for an additional amount of Rs.5,84,320/-. The Insurance Company 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 @ 7% per annum from the date of filing of claim application before the Tribunal till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. 9. Accordingly, this appeal is partly allowed and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nimmi