(MAC No.1006/2022) 2025:CGHC:40926 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1006 of 2022 1. Smt. Dhatri Patel, Wd/o Kamleshwar Patel, Aged about 26 years, Occupation Housewife, 2. Kunal Patel, S/o Kamleshwar Patel, Aged about 2 years, Minor through the mother (natural guardian) Smt. Dhatri Patel, Wd/o Kamleshwar Patel, 3. Smt. Sevti Bai Patel, Wd/o Lakhan Lal Patel, Aged about 44 years, Occupation Housewife, 4. Lakhan Lal Patel, S/o Kalyan Patel, Aged about 47 years, Occupation Agriculture, 5. Gulshan Kumar Patel, S/o Lakhan Lal Patel, Aged about 28 years, Occupation Agriculture, All R/o House No.163/02 Dipa, Village Chaple, Tahsil Kharsiya, District Raigarh (C.G.) at present Rajiv Nagar, Street No.02, Kotra Road, Raigarh, Tahsil & District Raigarh (C.G.) (surname is wrongly mentioned as Patail in place of Patel) (Applicants) ... Appellants versus 1. Vinod Maravi, S/o Shankarlal Maravi, Aged about 33 years, R/o Village Kirari, Police Station Akaltara, District Janjgir-Champa (Driver of the Vehicle No.CG-10/R- 1991) 2. Omprakash Bansal, S/o Radheshyam Bansal, Aged about 48 years, R/o Agrasen English Road, Ajad Nagar, Bilha, Ward No.04, Bilha, District Bilaspur (C.G.) (Owner of the Vehicle No.CG-10/R-1991) 3. Branch Manager,United India Insurance Company Limited, Local Office Sarla Vila, Chakradhar Nagar, Raigarh, Tahsil & District Raigarh (C.G.) (Insurer of the Vehicle No.CG-10/R-1991) (Non-applicants) ... Respondents SISTA SOMAYAJULU Digitally signed by SISTA SOMAYAJULU Date: 2025.08.20 10:52:50 +0530 (MAC No.1006/2022) For Appellants : Mr. Anand Kesharwani, Advocate. For Respondent No.3 : Mr. Abhishek Vinod Deshmukh, Advocate. Single Bench:- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment on Board 13/08/2025 1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, ‘the Act of 1988’) has been preferred by the appellants herein/claimants seeking enhancement in the amount of compensation, challenging the impugned award dated 22-11-2021 passed by the 7th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raigarh in Claim Case No.118/2021, whereby the learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of ₹ 17,35,080/- as compensation for the death of Kamleshwar Patel, who was working as Labour in Paddy Collection Centre at Anjoripal, Kharsiya, aged about 27 years at the time of incident. 2. Mr. Anand Kesharwani, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants herein/claimants, would submit that the deceased was working as Labour in Paddy Collection Centre at Anjoripal, Kharsiya and the learned Claims Tribunal ought to have taken his monthly income to be ₹ 9,200/- on the basis of notification issued under the Minimum Wages Act in the year 2021, whereas it has taken the monthly income of the deceased as ₹ 7,400/-, therefore, the amount of compensation be enhanced suitably. Page 3 of 4 (MAC No.1006/2022) 3. Mr. Abhishek Vinod Deshmukh, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3/Insurance Company, would support the impugned award and oppose the appeal. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered their rival submissions made herein-above and also went through the record with utmost circumspection. 5. The learned Claims Tribunal has assessed the monthly income of deceased Kamleshwar Patel to be ₹ 7,400/-, 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 ₹ 9,200/- (as per minimum wages prescribed at relevant time) and ₹ 1,10,400/- per annum. 6. Thus, considering the evidence available on record and that the deceased was working as Labour in Paddy Collection Centre at Anjoripal, Kharsiya, 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. v. 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:- 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 (MAC No.1006/2022) S. No. Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court/New Calculation 1. Income ₹ 7,400 x 12 = ₹ 88,800/- ₹ 9,200 x 12 = ₹ 1,10,400/- 2. Future Prospect (+) 40% i.e. ₹ 35,520; total income = ₹ 88,800 + 35,520 = ₹ 1,24,320/- (+) 40% i.e. ₹ 44,160; total income = ₹ 1,10,400 + 44,160 = ₹ 1,54,560/- 3. Deduction (-) ¼ = ₹ 31,080/- ₹ 1,24,320 – 31,080 = ₹ 93,240/- (total income) (-) ¼ = ₹ 38,640/- ₹ 1,54,560 – 38,640 = ₹ 1,15,920/- (total income) 4. Multiplier (x) 17 = ₹ 15,85,080/- (x) 17 = ₹ 19,70,640/- 5. Loss of Estate ₹ 15,000/- ₹ 16,500/- 6. Funeral Expenses ₹ 15,000/- ₹ 16,500/- 7. Loss of Consortium ₹. 40,000 x 3 = ₹ 1,20,000/- ₹ 44,000 x 4 = ₹ 1,76,000/- Total ₹ 17,35,080/- ₹ 21,79,640/- 7. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of ₹ 17,35,080/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to ₹ 21,79,640/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of ₹ 17,35,080/-, the appellants are held entitled for an additional amount of ₹ 4,44,560/-. The concerned respondent is directed to deposit the amount of compensation as enhanced by this Court within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of claim application before the Tribunal i.e. 9-8-2021 till its realisation. 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 Soma