Page No.1 2025:CGHC:12995 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 127 of 2020 1. Hira Ram S/o Late Jitu Ram Aged About 56 Years By Caste Uraon, R/o Village Dodkachaura, Tahsil And District Jashpur Chhattisgarh ..........Claimants), District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh 2. Smt. Urshela W/o Shri Hira Ram Aged About 52 Years By Caste Uraon, R/o Village Dodkachaura, Tahsil And District Jashpur Chhattisgarh ..........Claimants), District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant(s) versus 1. Ravindranath Yadav S/o Shri Sundar Ram Yadav Aged About 24 Years By Caste Ahir, R/o Village Darbaritoli, Tahsil And District Jashpur Chhattisgarh .........(Owner), District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh .. Respondent(s) _________________________________________________________ For Appellants : Mr. Divyanand Patel on behalf of Mr. Rishikant Mahobia, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr. Vishnu Sahu, Advocate. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order On Board 19/03/2025 1. Appellants-claimants have filed this appeal challenging the award dated 08.11.2019 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jashpur, District- Jashpur (for short ‘the Claims Tribunal’) in M.A.C.T. No.11/2019 whereby the Claims Tribunal allowed claim application of claimants in part and awarded NISHA DUBEY Digitally signed by NISHA DUBEY Date: 2025.03.21 16:15:43 +0530 Page No.2 compensation of Rs.6,72,600/- to claimants/appellants herein along with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of filing of claim application, in a fatal accident case. 2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that on 02.07.2017, Arvind Bhagat (since deceased) along with his friend Balendra Giri, was returning on motorcycle from Jashpur Market to his home situated in village Dodkachaura and when they reached in front of NES College, at that time, Scorpio vehicle bearing registration No.CG14-MD-2450, which was coming from opposite direction and driven in a rash and negligent manner by respondent herein, dashed their motorcycle and caused accident. In the said accident, Arvind Bhagat and Balendra Giri both suffered grievous injuries. They were brought to District Hospital, Jashpur for treatment where the doctor declared Arvind Bhagat dead. Accident was reported to concerned police station based on which Crime No.149/2017 for commission of alleged offence under Sections 279, 337 & 304A of the Indian Penal Code was registered against respondent. 3. Claimants/appellants herein, who are parents of deceased, filed a claim application claiming compensation to the tune of Rs.42,27,226/- under various heads on the ground that on the date of accident, deceased was working as Electrician, earning Rs.300/- per day and they were dependent on earning of deceased. Page No.3 4. Respondent, owner-cum-driver of offending vehicle, filed his reply to claim application denying averments made therein. It was pleaded that accident is not because of his negligence and even in the criminal case arising out of said accident, he stood acquitted. 5. The Claims Tribunal after appreciating the pleadings and evidence placed on record (oral and documentary both) by the respective parties has partly allowed claim application and awarded compensation Rs.6,72,600/- along with interest @ 6% p.a. by taking monthly income of deceased as Rs.4,500/- on notional basis treating the deceased to be a electrician. The Claims Tribunal has arrived at a conclusion that accident was the result of rash and negligent driving of respondent. 6. Learned counsel for the claimants/appellants submits that the claimants in their evidence have specifically stated that on the date of accident, deceased was working as electrician and earning Rs.300/- per day and in support thereof filed document Ex.A/12 issued by Sanjay Kumar Verma (AW-1), under whom deceased was working. However, the Claims Tribunal had not assessed income of deceased accordingly. He further argued that the Claims Tribunal has awarded less amount towards future prospects and even the amount awarded under other conventional head are also on lower side. In addition to the allowances allowed by the Claims Tribunal to the claimants, the claimants would be also entitled to additional compensation Page No.4 towards filial consortium i.e. Rs.40,000/- to each of the claimants being the parents of the deceased who was bachelor on the date of accident, and the interest awarded by the Claims Tribunal is also on the lower side and prayed for enhancement of the amount of compensation. 7. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent has supported the impugned award. He submits that the claimants failed to bring on record any documentary evidence establishing income of deceased as pleaded and stated by them. In absence thereof, the Claims Tribunal is justified in assessing income of deceased on notional basis. He further submits that amount of compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal in the given facts and circumstances of case is just and proper and it does not call for any interference. 8. At this stage, learned counsel for appellants submitted that even if they failed to prove the nature of employment of deceased and his engagement to be of labourer, income of deceased is to be assessed on the minimum wages fixed by the Competent Authority. 9. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record 10.So far as the submission of learned counsel for appellants that the Claims Tribunal wrongly assessed monthly income of deceased i.e. 4,500/- per month, is concerned, perusal of pleadings in claim application and statement of appellants would show that deceased Arvind Bhagat was working as electrician Page No.5 under the Contractor and earning Rs.300/- per day. AW-3 Sanjay Kumar Verma is the Contractor under whom deceased was working. This witness has stated that deceased was working under him and he was paying Rs.300/- per day as wages to him. This witness has also issued a certificate (Ex.A/12) in this regard. Thus, considering overall facts and circumstances of case, nature of employment of deceased as considered by Claims Tribunal, and also considering minimum wage rate prevailing on the date of accident in District Raipur, I am of the view that income of deceased can be fixed at Rs.8,320/- per month, taking help of the notification issued by Labour Commissioner, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, for unskilled labourer. 11.As regards the rate of interest, having regard to the recent trends of judicial pronouncements of Hon’ble Supreme Court, rate of interest awarded by the Claims Tribunal at the rate of six per cent is on lower side. The Claims Tribunal ought to have awarded interest at least at the rate of 7.5% per annum taking into consideration relevant facts including inflation and other economic factors. Accordingly, the rate of interest is enhanced from 6% to 7.5%. 12.For the foregoing, this Court proposes to recalculate amount of compensation payable to the claimants/appellants. 13.Accordingly, income of deceased is taken as Rs.8,320/- per month and since at the time of accident the deceased was 30 years old and working as labourer, therefore, in view of the law Page No.6 laid down in the matter of National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680, the income of deceased is required to be enhanced by 40% towards future prospects, which comes to Rs.11,648/-(8320+3328). Thus, annual income of deceased for the purpose of calculating compensation comes to Rs.1,39,776/-(11648x12). Out of this amount, half is to be deducted towards personal and living expenses of deceased being bachelor and after deducting half, annual loss of dependency would come to Rs.69,888/-. By applying multiplier of 17 as applied by Claims Tribunal, to annual loss of dependency, total loss of dependency would come to Rs.11,88,096/- (69888x17). Besides this, appellants are entitled for a sum of Rs.40,000/- each towards filial consortium being parents of the deceased, as held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matters of Pranay Sethi (supra) and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Nanu Ram @ Chuharu Ram reported in (2018) 8 SCC 130. In addition to aforesaid amount, appellants are also entitled to get a sum of Rs.15,000/- for funeral expenses and Rs.15,000/- for loss of estate. Thus, total amount of compensation comes to Rs.12,98,096/- (11,88,096 + 80,000 + 30,000) recoverable from the respondent. This amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 7.5% p.a. from the date of filing of claim application till its realization. Rest of the conditions mentioned in the impugned award shall remain intact. Page No.7 14.Any amount already paid to claimants/ appellants as compensation shall be adjusted from the total amount of compensation as calculated above. 15.In the result, the appeal is allowed in part and the impugned award stands modified to the extent indicated above. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Nisha