1 MAC No. 1298 of 2023 2025:CGHC:48647 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1298 of 2023 1. Smt. Geeta Rathiya Wd/o Late Shri Rohit Rathiya, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Village Rodopali, P.S. and Tahsil- Tamnar, at Present Danot, Tah. and District Raigarh, Civil and Revenue District Raigarh (C.G.). 2. Susmita D/o Late Shri Rohit Rathiya, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Village - Rodopali, P.S. & Tahsil - Tamnar, At Present Danot, Tah. & District Raigarh (C.G.). 3. Lokesh Rathiya S/o Late Shri Rohit Rathiya, Aged About 18 Years, R/o Village - Rodopali, P.S. And Tahsil- Tamnar, At Present Danot, Tah. And District Raigarh (C.G.). 4. Laxmi Rathiya W/o Shri Tejram Rathiya, Aged About 70 Years, R/o Village - Rodopali, P.S. And Tahsil - Tamnar, At Present Danot, Tah. And District Raigarh (C.G.). … Appellants versus 1. Ghurau Patel @ Padum Lal Patel S/o Late Shri Hariram Patel Occupation- Owner Of Vehicle And Driver, R/o Village- Mudagaon, Tahsil- Tamnar, District Raigarh (C.G.), (owner and driver of the offending vehicle). 2. The Oriental Insurance Company Limited Through Branch Manager Registered Office- Rahul Complex Third Floor, OP Jindal Road, Jagatpur And Axix Bank Raigarh, Tahsil And Distt.- Raigarh (C.G.) (Insurer of the offending vehicle). ... Respondents ANKIT KUMAR SINGH Digitally signed by ANKIT KUMAR SINGH Date: 2025.09.24 10:48:22 +0530 2 MAC No. 1298 of 2023 For Appellants :- Mr. M.K. Sinha, Advocate. For Respondent No.2 :- Mr. H.P. Agrawal, Advocate. SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment On Board 22.09.2025 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 in the amount of compensation, challenging the impugned award dated 29.10.2022 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raigarh, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh (for short “Claims Tribunal”) in Claim Case No. 31/2022, whereby learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of 18,75,350/- ₹ as compensation along with interest for death of Rohit Kumar Rathiya, who was a mason, aged about 42 years at the time of incident. 2. Mr. M.K. Sinha, learned counsel for the appellants, would submit that learned Claims Tribunal has erred in awarding less amount of compensation in the facts of the case. He would also submit that the Claims Tribunal erred in assessing income of deceased as 9,580/- per ₹ month which should be ₹9,850/- as per Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the office of the Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgar. He would also 3 MAC No. 1298 of 2023 submit that the Claims Tribunal has also erred in not awarding the amount under the head of estate, therefore, the instant appeal be allowed and the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal may suitably be enhanced. 3. Mr. H.P. Agrawal, learned counsel for the Insurance Company/respondent No.2, would submit that the appellants have failed to prove nature of occupation and income of deceased by producing clinching and admissible piece of evidence, hence, the Tribunal is justified in assessing income of deceased on notional basis. The amount of compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is just and proper which does not call for any interference. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and gone through the records meticulously. 5. Learned Claims Tribunal assessed the monthly income of deceased to be 9,540/-, however, in the opinion of this ₹ Court, as per the Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the office of Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh, the monthly income of the deceased should be ₹9,850/- (as per minimum wages prescribed at 4 MAC No. 1298 of 2023 relevant time) and 1,18,200/- per annum. Moreover, the ₹ amount under the head of estate is liable to be awarded. 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 Sethi1, 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:- Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1. Income ₹ 9,540 x 12 = ₹ 1,14,480/- ₹ 9,850 x 12 = 1,18,200/- ₹ 2. Future prospect (+) 25% = ₹28,620/- total income = ₹ 1,43,100/- (+) 25% = ₹ 29,550/- total income = ₹ 1,47,750/- 3. Deduction (-) ¼ = 35,775/- ₹ ₹ 1,43,100 – 35,775= ₹ 1,07,325/- (total income) (-) ¼ = 36,937/- ₹ ₹ 1,47,750 – 36,937 = 1,10,813/- (total ₹ income) 4. Multiplier (x) 14 = 15,02,550/- ₹ (x) 14 = 15,51,382/- ₹ 5. Loss of Estate Nil ₹ 15,000/- 6. Funeral Expenses ₹ 16,500/- ₹ 16,500/- 7. Spousal Consortium ₹44,000/- 44,000/- ₹ 8. Parental Consortium ₹88,000/- 88,000/- ₹ 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 5 MAC No. 1298 of 2023 9. Filial Consortium ₹44,000/- 44,000/- ₹ 10. Expenditure on treatment ₹1,80,300/- 1,80,300/- ₹ Total ₹ 18,75,350/- ₹ 19,39,182/- 7. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of ₹18,75,350/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to ₹19,39,182/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of ₹18,75,350/-, the appellants are held to be entitled to an additional amount of ₹63,832/- . The concerned respondent is directed to deposit the amount of compensation as enhanced by this Court within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 9% 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. 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 Ankit