1 / 4 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1040 of 2016 1. Radheshyam Sonvaane S/o Late Baagi, Aged About 61 Years 2. Geeta Bai Sonvaane, W/o Radheshyam Sonwane, Aged About 58 Years 3. Kumari Bharti Sonvaane, D/o Radheshyam Sonvaane, Aged About 20 Years All are R/o- Mahadev Nagar, Near Aashadeep School, New Changorabhata, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Appellants Versus 1. Brikesh Yadav S/o Motilal Yadav, Aged About 22 Years R/o- Village- Kupa, Post- Aarangi, Police Station- Kharaudi, District- Gadva Jharkhand, Presently Resident At Rajdhani Homes, Saddu, Mova, Pandri, Polcie Station- Pandri, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh, (Driver) 2. Director, D.S. Construction Limited, through M.S. Narula, S/o M. Narula Aged About 50 Years, R/o- South Delhi, Presently Resided At Telibanda, Raipur, Tehsil and District: Raipur, Chhattisgarh (Owner) ... Respondent(s) For Appellants : Ms. Prachi Diwan, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Dinesh Verma, Advocate For Respondents : None, though served. SAURABH YADAV Digitally signed by SAURABH YADAV Date: 2025.08.14 16:23:33 +0530 2 / 4 Hon'ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal Judgment on Board 13.08.2025 1. The appellants, being parents and sister of the deceased Kumari Aarti Sonvaane, aged 17 years, student, filed an application for compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, as she died on account of injuries suffered by her in a motor vehicular accident occurred on 30.12.2013 due to rash and negligent driving of vehicle bearing registration No. CG 04 ZA 2326 by Respondent No. 1/Driver and it was owned by respondent No. 2, at the time of accident. 2. After considering the evidence led by both the parties, the learned Seventh Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur, District Raipur, C.G (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’) by the impugned award dated 07.05.2016, in Claim Case No. 29 of 2015 awarded total compensation of Rs. 1,12,500/- in favour of the claimants with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of application till its realization, fastening liability on the respondents, jointly and severally. 3. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid award, the appellants have filed the instant appeal for enhancement. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the amount awarded by the learned Tribunal is very much on the lower side and future prospects has also not been awarded. He further submits that the deceased was a 17 years old girl and at least Rs. 5,00,000/- amount may be awarded keeping in view the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Kishan Gopal and another Vs. Lala and others, (2014) 1 SCC 244 and Meena Devi Vs. Nunu Chand Mahto @ Nemchand Mahto & Others. 3 / 4 5. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the material available on record. 6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Kishan Gopal (supra), wherein a child aged about 10 years died in motor vehicular accident occurred on 19.07.1992 and the claimants were young parents, considering its various earlier decisions awarded Rs. 5 Lacs towards total loss of dependency. 7. Dealing with the issue the Supreme Court in the matter of Meena Devi (supra) has held in paragraph 13 which reads as under: “13. Thus applying the ratio of the said judgments, looking to the age of the child in the present case i.e. 12 years, the principles laid down in the case of Kishan Gopal (supra) are aptly applicable to the facts of the present case. As per the ocular statement of the mother of the deceased, it is clear that deceased was a brilliant student and studying in a private school. Therefore, accepting the notional earning Rs.30,000/- including future prospect and applying the multiplier of 15 in view of the decision of this Court in Sarla Verma (supra), the loss of dependency comes to Rs. 4,50,000/- and if we add Rs. 50,000/- in conventional heads, then the total sum of compensation comes to Rs. 5,00,000/-. As per the judgment of MACT, lump sum compensation of Rs. 1,50,000/- has been awarded, while the High Court enhanced it to Rs. 2,00,000/- up to the value of the Claim Petition. In our view, the said amount of compensation is not just and reasonable looking to the computation made hereinabove. Hence, we determine the total compensation as Rs. 5,00,000/- and on reducing the amount as awarded by the High Court i.e. Rs. 2,00,000/-, the enhanced amount comes to Rs. 3,00,000/-.” 4 / 4 8. Thus, in view of the aforesaid decisions, looking to the age of the parents and that of the deceased, this Court is of the opinion that the appellants-claimants are entitled for a total sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- as compensation. Since the Tribunal has already awarded Rs. 1,12,500/-, after deducting the same, the claimants are held entitled for additional compensation of Rs. 3,87,500/- with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of application till realization. However, rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. Ordered accordingly. 9. With the aforesaid modification in the award impugned, the appeal stands disposed of. Sd/- (Radhakishan Agrawal) JUDGE Saurabh