Page No.1 of 6 IN MAC-997-2025 2025:CGHC:39170 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 997 of 2022 [Arising out of award dated 29.03.2022, passed in Claim Case No.62 of 2020 (Sitaram Kanediya vs. Laxman Prasad and others) by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Surajpur (CG)] Sitaram Kanediya S/o Girdhari Kanediya, Aged About 32 Years R/o Village - Anrokha, Police Station- Bhatgaon, Tahsil - Bhaiyathan, District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant/ Claimant Versus 1 - Laxman Prasad S/o Devlal Aged About 30 Years R/o Village - Anrokha, Police Station - Bhatgaon, Tahsil - Bhaiyathan Respondents / Non Applicant No. 1 / Driver Of Motor Cycle Bearing Registration No. C.G. 15 - Dk - 2242, District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Shivbodh Ram Rajwade S/o Chandan Ram Aged About 46 Years R/o Village - Anrokha, Police Station - Bhatgaon, Tahsil - Bhaiyathan Non Applicant No. 2 / Owner Of Motor Cycle Bearing Registration No. C.G. 15 - Dk - 2242, District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh 3 - ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd. Lombard House 414, Bir Savarkar Marg, Near Siddhi Vinayak Mandir, Prabha Devi, Mumbai 400025 Through Branch Manager, Branch Office Ambedkar Chowk, Karta Ram Gupta Complex, Ambikapur Non Applicant No. 3 / Insurer Of Motor Cycle Bearing Registration No. C.G. 15 - Dk - 2242, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh ... Respondents [Cause-title taken from Case Information System (CIS)] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Appellant : Mr. Akash Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondent No.1 & 2 : None though served. For Respondent No.3 : Mr. Shobhit Mishra, Advocate SAIFAN KHAN Digitally signed by SAIFAN KHAN Page No.2 of 6 IN MAC-997-2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Single Bench: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal (Order on Board) 06.08.2025 1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short the “Act of 1988”) has been preferred by the appellant/claimant seeking enhancement of amount of compensation, challenging the impugned award dated 29.03.2022, passed in Claim Case No.62 of 2020 (Sitaram Kanediya vs. Laxman Prasad and others) by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Surajpur (CG), whereby learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.1,15,224/- as compensation for the injuries sustained by the appellant in the accident occurred on 10.02.2020. 2. Facts of the case, relevant for disposal of this appeal, are that on the date of occurrence i.e. 10.02.2020, while the appellant/claimant walking back from Anrekha Market and, at that juncture, the respondent No.01- driver, who was driving the offending vehicle i.e. Motor-cycle bearing No.CG-15-DK-2242 drove the said vehicle in rash and negligent manner and dashed the appellant, due to which, the appellant suffered injuries. Thereafter, the appellants filed an application under Section 166 of the Act of 1988 seeking compensation to the tune of Rs.7,36,250/- pleading therein that in the said accident, he suffered crack in his skull, fracture in left leg and other grievous injuries over his other body part, for which, he underwent treatment at Govt. Hospital, Bhatgaon, Holycross Hospital and Shri Ram Hospital, Ambikapur. Even Page No.3 of 6 IN MAC-997-2025 otherwise, the appellant was aged about 32 years on the date of accident and was a able-bodied person and, on account of the injuries sustained by him in the aforesaid accident, the appellant have suffered physically and mentally as well and has also incurred huge financial loss. 3. Respondents No.1 & 2 – driver and owner of the offending vehicle submitted their reply to the claim application, while denying all the adverse pleadings made in the application, it was further pleaded that the accident was not caused by the aforesaid vehicle and the appellant/claimant suffered injuries on account of his own carelessness, moreover, on the date of the accident, the driver of the said vehicle was having valid driving license as well as the said vehicle (Motor-cycle) was duly insured with respondent No.3, therefore, the liability of compensation lies upon the Insurance Company i.e. respondent No.3. 4. Respondent No. 3 i.e. the Insurance Company has opposed the claim application stating that the said vehicle (Motor-cycle) was being used in violation of terms and conditions of the insurance policy. 5. Learned Claims Tribunal, upon appreciation of pleadings and evidence placed on record by respective parties, held that the appellant/claimant suffered injuries in the accident arising out of rash and negligent driving of the aforesaid vehicle i.e. Motor-cycle bearing No.CG-15-DK-2242, which was driven by the respondent No.01 and owned by respondent No.02 herein. Breach of conditions of insurance policy was not found to be proved, and after calculating the amount of Page No.4 of 6 IN MAC-997-2025 compensation, awarded Rs.1,15,224/- as total compensation with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of filing of claim application. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that learned Claims Tribunal has erred in awarding less amount of compensation in the facts of the case. Claims Tribunal erred in assessing income of appellant as Rs.6,500/- per month which should be Rs.9,120/- as per Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the office of the Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh. Apart from it, learned Claims Tribunal has also awarded less amount towards other heads i.e. pain and agony, special diet, transportation etc., which may also be enhanced suitably. Therefore, the instant appeal be allowed and the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal may suitably be enhanced. 7. Learned counsel for the respondent would submit that the appellant have failed to prove nature of occupation and income by producing clinching and admissible piece of evidence, hence, the Tribunal is justified in assessing income of the appellant on notional basis. The amount of compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is just and proper which does not call for any interference. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection. 9. Learned Claims Tribunal assessed the monthly income of the Page No.5 of 6 IN MAC-997-2025 appellant/claimant to be Rs.6,500/-, 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 appellant should be Rs.9,120/- PM (as per minimum wages prescribed at relevant time). Similarly, on other heads also, it appears that the learned Claims tribunal has awarded less amount, which also need to be enhanced suitably. 10. 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 Sethi 1, 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. Loss of Income Rs.6,500 x 3 = Rs.19,500/- Rs.9,120 x 03 = Rs.27,360/- 2. Pain and agony (+) Rs.25,000/- (+) Rs.50,000/- 3. Medical expense (as per bill Exhibit-A/13 to A/24) (+) Rs.39,724/- (+) Rs.39,724/- 4. Special Diet (+) Rs.5,000/- (+) Rs.10,000/- 5. Transportation (as per bill Exhibit-A/31 to A/39) (+) Rs.12,000/- (+) Rs.18,000/- 6. Assistance (+) Rs.7,000/- (+) Rs.10,000/- 7. Future medical treatment (+) Rs.7,000/- (+) Rs.25,000/- Total Rs.1,15,224/- Rs.1,80,084/- 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 Page No.6 of 6 IN MAC-997-2025 11. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs.1,15,224/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.1,80,084/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs.1,15,224/-, the appellant is held entitled for an additional amount of Rs.64,860/-. The concerned respondent is directed to deposit the amount of compensation as enhanced by this Court within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of claim application before the Tribunal i.e. 03.12.2020 till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. 12. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed in part and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. The deposit Tribunal shall pass appropriate order with regard to apportionment, investment and disbursement of the enhanced amount of compensation. sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge s@if