Page No.1 of 7 IN MAC-1059-2022 2025:CGHC:48038 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1059 of 2022 [Arising out of award dt.29.06.2022, passed in Claims Case No.345/2021 (Smt. Laxmi Verma and other v. Shree Harjeet Singh and others) by the Chief Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur (CG)] 1 - Smt Laxmi Verma W/o Late Shri Leelaram Verma Aged About 42 Years R/o Kargil Chowk, Mararpara, Near Lekhu Kirana Stores, Chhawani, Thana - Jamul, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 2 - Shubham Verma S/o Late Shri Leelaram Verma Aged About 23 Years R/o Kargil Chowk, Mararpara, Near Lekhu Kirana Stores, Chhawani, Thana - Jamul, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 3 - Rishabh Verma S/o Late Shri Leelaram Verma Aged About 22 Years R/o Kargil Chowk, Mararpara, Near Lekhu Kirana Stores, Chhawani, Thana - Jamul, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 4 - Prishita Verma D/o Late Leelaram Verma Aged About 19 Years R/o Kargil Chowk, Mararpara, Near Lekhu Kirana Stores, Chhawani, Thana - Jamul, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 5 - Smt. Devmati Verma W/o Late Milap Verma Aged About 70 Years R/o Kargil Chowk, Mararpara, Near Lekhu Kirana Stores, Chhawani, Thana - Jamul, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Appellants Versus 1 - Harjeet Singh S/o Late Shri Pargat Singh Aged About 44 Years R/o Khulsipar K.L.C, Quarter No. 21 E, Thana Khursipar, District - Durg, Chhattisgarh (Driver Of Vehicle Truck No. Cg 07 Ca 9877) 2 - Sudarshan Kumar Nirala S/o Shri Mahingi Ram Nirala Aged About 42 Years R/o Industrial City, Housing Board Mig/2/2244, Thana - Jamul District Durg Chhattisgarh (Owner Of Vehicle Truck No. Cg 07 Ca 9877) SAIFAN KHAN Digitally signed by SAIFAN KHAN Page No.2 of 7 IN MAC-1059-2022 3 - United India Insurance Company Limited Through Branch Manager, United India Insurance Company Limited, Krishna Complex, Kutcheri Chowk, Raipur Chhattisgarh (Insurer Of Vehicle Truck No. Cg 07 Ca 9877) ... Respondents [Cause-title taken from Case Information System (CIS)] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Appellants : Mr. Ashish Pandey, Advocate For Respondents No.1-2 : None though served. For Respondent No.3 : Mr. Abhishek Mishra, Advocate ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Single Bench: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal (Order on Board) 18.09.2025 1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short the “Act of 1988”) has been preferred by the appellants/claimants seeking enhancement of amount of compensation, challenging the impugned award dt.29.06.2022, passed in Claims Case No.345/2021 (Smt. Laxmi Verma and other v. Shree Harjeet Singh and others) by the Chief Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur (CG), whereby learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.15,67,528/- as compensation for the death of Shri Leelaram Verma, who was aged about 44 years on the date of occurrence. 2. Facts of the case, relevant for disposal of this appeal, are that on the date of occurrence i.e. 03.10.2020, at about 08 PM, while deceased was travelling to Chhawani from Village Hathkhoj with one Vimal Verma in his motorcycle as pillion rider, and, when he Page No.3 of 7 IN MAC-1059-2022 reached near Rukhmani Dharamkanta, Tiranga Chowk, Chhawani, the driver (respondent No.1) of the offending vehicle i.e. Truck bearing No. CG-07-CA-9877, drove the same in rash and negligent manner and hit the motor-cycle in which the deceased was sitting, due to which, the deceased suffered injuries and died. Thereafter, the appellants, who are dependents of the deceased, filed an application under Section 166 of the Act of 1988 seeking compensation to the tune of Rs.56,30,000/- pleading therein that on the date of the accident, the deceased was 44 years of age and used to earn Rs.24,000/- PM from his work of Contractor. The deceased used to maintain his family members and, after his death, his family members have no any source of income to survive. Even otherwise, the deceased was aged about 44 years on the date of accident and was a able-bodied person and on account of his untimely death in the accident, the appellants have suffered economical and psychological difficulties. 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 deceased has died 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 (Truck) Page No.4 of 7 IN MAC-1059-2022 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 (Truck) was being used in violation of terms and conditions of insurance policy. 5. Learned Claims Tribunal, upon appreciation of pleadings and evidence placed on record by respective parties, held that deceased died in the accident arising out of rash and negligent driving of the aforesaid vehicle i.e. Truck bearing No. CG-07-CA-9877, which was driven by respondent No.01 and owned by respondent No.2 herein. Breach of conditions of insurance policy was not found to be proved, and after calculating the amount of compensation, awarded Rs.16,67,528/- as total compensation with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing of the claim application. 6. 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. Claims Tribunal erred in assessing income of deceased as Rs.9,230/- per month which should be Rs.10,910/- as per Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the office of the Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh. Further, learned Claims Tribunal also erred in awarded Rs.15,000/- each on the heads of funeral expenses and loss of estate, whereas it ought to have been Page No.5 of 7 IN MAC-1059-2022 Rs.16,500/- each. Even, the learned Claims Tribunal has awarded total Rs.80,000/- on the heads of loss of consortium to the appellants, which ought to have been granted Rs.44,000/- for each of the appellants. Therefore, the instant appeal be allowed and the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal may suitably be enhanced. 7. Learned counsel for the respondents 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. 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 deceased to be Rs.9,230/-, 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 Rs.10,910/- PM (as per minimum wages prescribed at relevant time). Further, on the heads of funeral expenses and loss of estate Rs.15,000/- each has been awarded, whereas it ought to have been Rs.16,500/- each and on the heads of Page No.6 of 7 IN MAC-1059-2022 loss of consortium to the appellants Rs.80,000/- have only been awarded, but it ought to have been awarded Rs.44,000/- for each of the appellant. 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. Income Rs.9230 x 12 = Rs.1,10,760/- Rs.9,800 x 12 = Rs.1,30,920/- 2. Deduction (-) 1/4 (i.e. Rs.27,690/-) = Rs.83,070/- (-) 1/4 (i.e. Rs.32,730/-) = Rs.98,190/- 3. Multiplier (x) 13 = Rs.10,79,910/- (x) 13 = Rs. Rs.12,76,470/- 4. Future Prospect (+) 25% (i.e. Rs.2,69,978/-) = Rs.13,49,888/- (+) 25% (i.e. Rs.3,19,118/-) = Rs.15,95,588/- 5. Medical Expenses Rs.1,07,640/- Rs.1,07,640/- 6. Loss of Estate Rs. 15,000/- Rs.16,500/- 7. Funeral Expenses Rs. 15,000/- Rs.16,500/- 8. Loss of Consortium Rs.80,000/- Rs.44,000/- x 5 = Rs.2,20,000/- 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 Page No.7 of 7 IN MAC-1059-2022 Total Rs.15,67,528/- Rs.19,56,228/- 11. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs.15,67,528/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.19,56,228/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs.15,67,528/-, the appellants are held entitled for an additional amount of Rs.3,88,700/-. The concerned respondents are directed to deposit the amount of compensation as enhanced by this Court within a period of 45 days 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 claim application before the Tribunal 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. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge s@if