1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 576 of 2021 1 - Smt. Sarita Bai Sagar Wd/o Late Suresh Kumar Sagar @ Anandram Aged About 21 Years R/o Village Chilhati, Post Mopka, Police Station Sarkanda, Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Surya Kumar Sagar S/o Late Suesh Kumar Sagar @ Anandram Aged About 1 Years Appellant No. 02 Is Minor, Through The Mother (Natural Guardian) Smt. Sarita Bai Sagar, Wd/o Late Suresh Kumar Sagar @ Anandram, Aged About 21 Year, R/o Village Chilhati, Post Mopka, Police Station Sarkanda, Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Shri Sukhram @ Roop Sagar S/o Late Itwari Aged About 53 Years R/o Village Chilhati, Post Mopka, Police Station Sarkanda, Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Smt. Mongara Bai W/o Shri Sukhram @ Roop Sagar Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Chilhati, Post Mopka, Police Station Sarkanda, Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Appellants versus 1 - Binod Kumar Yadaw S/o Vasudeo Yadaw Aged About 27 Years R/o Village Amba, Police Station Rampur, District Gaya Bihar (Bihar). At Present Ward No. 06, Gharghoda, Police Station Gharghoda, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh. (Driver Of The Vehicle Truck No. C.G. 13 L /8676)., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 2 - Manish Kumar Sinha S/o Mahesh Prasad Sinha R/o Ward No. 06, Nawapara Gharghoda, Police Station Gharghoda, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh. ( Owner Of The Vehicle Truck No. C.G. 13 L /8676), District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 3 - The New India Insurance Company Limited Through Divisional Manager, Through Divisional Office In Front Of Rajiv Plaza, Old Bus Stand, Bilaspur, Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhatisgarh. (Insurer Of The Vehicle Truck No. C.G. - 13 L /8676)., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) 2 For Appellants : Mr. Anand Kesharwani, Advocate For Respondent No. 3 : Mr. Raj Awasthi, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput Order on Board 09/09/2025 This appeal has been filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short MV Act) challenging the award dated 11.12.2018 passed in Claim Case No. 124/2018 by the 2nd Upper Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, CG. By the impugned award, against a claim of Rs. 24,50,000/-, the learned Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs. 10,90,600/- on account of death of deceased Suresh Kumar Sagar @ Anandram in an accident that took place on 15.12.2016 by rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle i.e. Truck Max bearing registration No. CG 13/L8676 driven by the respondent No. 1 / driver, owned by respondent Nos. 2 / owner and insured with the respondent No. 3 / insurance company. 2. As per the pleadings of the claim application, the deceased was aged about 24 years and was earning Rs. 7500/- and was working as a helper of the truck. 3. The respondent Nos. 1 & 2 / driver and owner remained ex-parte and did not file any written statement. 3. The claim application was resisted by the respondent No. 3 on various grounds and the learned Tribunal framed issues on the basis of the pleadings and decided the same in favour of the appellants / claimants. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants / claimants submits that the income of the deceased has been taken on the lower side and compensation on all other heads is also on the lower side. In support of above contention, reliance has been placed on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matters of Smt. Sarla Verma and 3 others VS. Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121, National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680. 5. Learned counsel for the respondents supports the award and submits that just compensation has been awarded hence no interference is warranted. 6. Heard the learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions and perused the record. 7. Considering that the deceased Suresh Kumar Sagar @ Anandram on the date of accident was aged about 24 years, keeping in view the nature of his job; evidence available on record; number of dependents; date of incident and minimum wages prevailing, this Court holds the monthly income of the deceased to Rs. 6500/- per month. In light of the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of National Insurance Company Ltd. V. Pranay Sethi (supra); Sarla Verma & Ors. (supra) and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors; (2018) 18 SCC 130, this Court is computing the compensation as below:- S. No. Description Amount 1. Monthly income 6500/- 2. 40% Future prospect 2600/- 3. Total Monthly Income (6500+2600) 9100/- 4. Total Yearly Income (9100x12) 109200/- 5. 1/4 Deduction for personal expenses of deceased 27300/- 6. Net income 81,900/- 7. Multiplier of 18 applied to assess total loss of dependency 14,74,200/- 8. Funeral Expenses 15,000/- 9. Loss of estate 15,000/- 10. Spousal consortium 40,000/- 10. Parental and filial consortium 1,20,000/- Total compensation 16,64,200/- 8. For the forgoing reasons, the appeal is allowed in part. The amount of compensation of Rs. 10,90,600/- awarded by learned tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 16,64,200/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs. 10,90,600/-, the claimants 4 are held entitled for an additional amount of Rs. 5,73,600/-. The additional amount shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of i.e. 14.09.2021. The impugned award stands modified to the above extent. 9. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced amount of compensation within 60 days. After deposit 2,50,000 shall be invested as fixed deposit in a nationalized bank till attaining majority in the name of appellant No. 2; Rs. 50,000/- (each) shall be disbursed to appellant Nos. 3 and 4; Rs. 1,50,000/- shall be invested as fixed deposit in a nationalized bank for a period of two years in the name of appellant No. 1 and remaining amount shall be paid to appellant No. 1 through bank transaction/account payee cheque. 10. No cost. Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) JUDGE Pawan