1 2025:CGHC:33719 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1190 of 2022 1 - Smt. Bimla Wd/o Late Deeplal Aged About 32 Years Caste - Gond, R/o Village Kusmusi, Police Station, Tahsil And District - Surajpur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Maneshwar S/o Late Deeplal Aged About 15 Years Being Minor Through Their Legal Guardian Mother Smt. Bimla Wd/o Late Deeplal, Cast - Gond R/o Village Kusmusi, Police Station, Tahsil And District - Surajpur Chhattisgarh. 3 - Pramila D/o Late Deeplal Aged About 13 Years Being Minor Through Their Legal Guardian Mother Smt. Bimla Wd/o Late Deeplal, Cast - Gond R/o Village Kusmusi, Police Station, Tahsil And District - Surajpur Chhattisgarh. 4 - Ramkumar S/o Banshu Aged About 75 Years Cast - Gond R/o Village Kusmusi, Police Station, Tahsil And District - Surajpur Chhattisgarh. 5 - Basanti W/o Ramkumar Aged About 70 Years Cast - Gond R/o Village Kusmusi, Police Station, Tahsil And District - Surajpur Chhattisgarh. … Appellants versus HARNEET KAUR Digitally signed by HARNEET KAUR Date: 2025.07.26 15:35:52 +0530 2 1 - Vishnu Singh @ Kanhai S/o Fulsai Aged About 30 Years Caste - Gond, R/o Village Koilari Police Station - Jhilmili (Bhaiyathan), District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh. (Driver Of Vehicle No. Cg-15-B-5777) 2 - Pappu Agrawal S/o Late Deviprasad Agrawal Aged About 47 Years Caste - Agrawal, R/o Sattipara, Bechan Colony, Ambikapur, Post And Police Station - Ambikapur, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh. (Owner Of Vehicle No. Cg- 15-B-5777) 3 - The United India Insurance Company Ltd Through Branch Manager, Branch Office - Ambikapur, Bramh Road Near Kumkum Hotel Ambikapur, Post And Police Station Ambikapur, District Sarguja Chhatisgarh. ... Respondents For Appellants : Mr. Akash Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondent No. 1 : None though served For Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Tanuj Patwardhan, Advocate For Respondent No. 3 : Mr. Abhishek Vinod Deshmukh, Advocate SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment On Board 17.07 .2025 1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “Act of 1988”) has been preferred by the appellants seeking enhancement of amount of compensation, challenging the impugned award dated 25/11/2021 passed by learned 1st Additional Motor 3 Accident Claims Tribunal, Surajpur in Claim Case No. 16/2020, whereby learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs. 13,04,600/- as compensation for the death of Deeplal, aged about 35 years, working as a Mason. 2. Facts of the case relevant for disposal of this appeal are that on 06/09/2018 at about 04:30 PM, deceased Deeplal was driving his motorcycle bearing Registration No. CG 15 CZ 5891 and one Sonelal Kanwar was riding as pillion rider and they were going to Bhaiyathan to buy cement, however, at the main road of village Koilaari, on account of rash and negligent driving of respondent No. 1 dashed his Scorpio bearing Registration No. CG 15 B 5777 owned by respondent No. 2, from behind and caused the accident due to which deceased Deeplal suffered grievous injuries and while he was being taken for treatment to Om Hospital, Raipur, he died on the way while returning back on the advice of the Doctor. Upon receiving the information regarding the accident, Crime No. 14/2019 was registered at Police Station Jhilmili (Bhaiyathan) against respondent No. 1. 3. Appellants, who are wife, son, daughter, father and mother of deceased Deeplal, respectively, filed an application under Section 166 read with Section 140 of the Act of 1988 seeking compensation to the tune of Rs. 55,60,000/- 4 pleading therein that on the date of the accident, deceased Deeplal was aged about 35 years and was working as a Mason (rajmistri) and earned Rs. 15,000/- per month. 4. Respondents No. 1 & 2 -driver and owner of the Scorpio vehicle submitted their reply to the claim application, while denying all the adverse pleadings made in the application, it was further pleaded that on the date of the accident, respondent No. 1 had valid driving license as well as the vehicle was duly insured with respondent No. 3, therefore, the liability of compensation lies upon the Insurance Company i.e. respondent No. 3. 5. Respondent No. 3 i.e. the Insurance Company has opposed the claim application stating that the said vehicle was being used in violation of terms and conditions of insurance policy as respondent No. 1 did not have valid driving license on the date of the accident. 6. Learned Claims Tribunal, upon appreciation of pleadings and evidence placed on record by respective parties, held that deceased Vasudev Sahu died due to the accident arising out of rash and negligent driving of the aforesaid vehicle driven by respondent No. 1 and owned by respondent No. 2 and after calculating the amount of compensation, awarded Rs. 13,04,600/- as total 5 compensation with interest @ 8% p.a. from the date of filing of claim application. 7. 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. 6000/- per month which should be Rs. 7,800/- as per Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the Labour Commissioner of Chhattisgarh in the year 2018 and for loss of consortium, only Rs. 40,000/- has been awarded by the Tribunal whereas Rs. 40,000/- for each of the appellants ought to have been awarded, therefore, the instant appeal be allowed and the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal may suitably be enhanced. 8. 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. 9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection. 6 10. Learned Claims Tribunal assessed the monthly income of deceased Deeplal to be Rs. 6,000/-, however, in the opinion of this Court, as per the Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the Labour Commissioner of Chhattisgarh in the year 2018, the monthly income of the deceased should be Rs. 7,800/- (as per minimum wages prescribed at relevant time) and Rs. 93,600/- per annum. Moreover, a sum of Rs. 40,000/- has been awarded by the Tribunal to the appellants as loss of consortium whereas Rs. 40,000/- each ought to be awarded as loss of consortium for all the five appellants. 11. 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. 6,000 x 12 = Rs. 72,000/- Rs. 7,800 x 12 = Rs. 93,600/- 2. Future Prospect (+) 40% i.e. (+) 40% i.e. 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 7 Rs. 28,800/- = Rs. 1,00,800/- Rs. 37,440/- = Rs. 1,31,040/- 3. Deduction (-) ¼ i.e. Rs. 25,200/- = Rs. 75,600/- (-) ¼ i.e. Rs.32,760/- = Rs. 98,280 4. Multiplier (x) 16 = Rs. 12,09,600/- (x) 16 = Rs. 15,72,480/- 5. Loss of Estate Rs. 15,000/- Rs, 15,000/- 6. Funeral Expenses Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 15,000/- 7. Loss of Consortium Rs. 40,000/- Rs. 2,00,000/- 8. Medical Expense Rs. 25,000/- Rs. 25,000/- Total Rs. 13,04,600/- Rs. 18,27,480/- 12. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs. 13,04,600/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 18,27,480/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs. 13,04,600/-, the appellants are held entitled for an additional amount of Rs. 5,22,880/-. The Respondents are 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 @ 8% per annum from the date of filing of claim application before the Tribunal i.e. 20/12/2019 till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. 8 13. 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 Harneet