1 2025:CGHC:46560 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1240 of 2022 1 - Smt. Bhagwantin Bai, W/o. Samelal Kanwar, Aged About 40 Years, R/o. Village - Navagoan, Thana And Tahsil - Kurud, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Samelal Kanwar, S/o. Nakul Singh Kanwar, Aged About 45 Years, R/o. Village - Navagoan, Thana And Tahsil - Kurud, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Appellants versus 1 - Shankar Lal Sinha, S/o. Shri Gokul Sinha, Aged About 40 Years, R/o. Temri, Thana - Mana Camp, Tahsil And District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh. (Driver Of The Offending Vehicle Truck Haiwa No. C.G. 04/J.D./9711) 2 - Aakash Ratnani, S/o. Gopal Das Ratnani, Aged About 29 Years, R/o. House No.22, Sector-07,, Near Krishna Kids School, New Rajendra Nagar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. (Owner Of The Offending Vehicle Truck Haiwa No. C.G.04/J.D./9711) ASHOK SAHU Digitally signed by ASHOK SAHU Date: 2025.09.12 13:47:15 +0530 2 3 - New India Insurance Company Limited, Through Divisional Manager, Divisional Office No.03, R.D.A. Building, G.E. Road, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. (Insurer Of The Offending Vehicle Truck Haiwa No. C.G. 04/J.D./9711) ... Respondents For Appellants : Mr. A.L.Singroul, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Azad Siddiqui, Advocate (Single Bench) Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment on Board 11.09.2025 1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act has been preferred by the appellants/claimants seeking enhancement of the amount of compensation, challenging the impugned award dated 05.08.2022 passed by learned 12th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur, in Claim Case No.446/2020, whereby the claim application of the claimants has been allowed and an amount of Rs. 12,56,360/- has been awarded as compensation to the claimants for the death of Prakash Kumar Kanwar, aged about 20 years, at the time of incident. 2. Appellants, who are mother & father of the deceased Prakash Kumar Kanwar filed an application under Section 166 of the Act 3 of 1988 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for brevity “Claims Tribunal”) seeking compensation to the tune of Rs. 30,50,000/- pleading therein that on the date of accident, deceased Prakash Kumar Kanwar was aged about 20 years and was a sole bread earner of the family and on account of his untimely death in the accident, the appellants have suffered economical and psychological difficulties. 3. Learned Claims Tribunal, upon appreciation of pleadings and evidence placed on record by respective parties, held that deceased Prakash Kumar Kanwar died in the accident arising out of rash & negligent driving of the offending vehicle driven by the respondent No.1, owned by the respondent No.2 and insured by the respondent No.3. Breach of conditions of insurance policy was not found to be proved and after calculating the amount of compensation, the learned Claims Tribunal awarded Rs. 12,56,360/- as total compensation with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of filing of claim application. 4. Mr. Arjun Lal Singroul, learned counsel for the appellants, would submit that the learned Claims Tribunal has awarded very meager amount, as the Claims Tribunal erred in assessing income of deceased as Rs.7,800/- per month, which should be 4 Rs. 8,860/- as per Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the office of the Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh for skilled labour. Therefore, the instant appeal be allowed and the amount of compensation awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal may be enhanced suitably. 5. Mr. Azad Siddiqui, learned counsel for the insurance company/ respondent No.3 would submit that the appellants have failed to prove the exact income of deceased by producing clinching and admissible piece of evidence, hence, the learned Claims Tribunal is justified in assessing income of deceased on notional basis. The amount of compensation awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal is just and proper, which does not call for any interference. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and gone through the records minutely. 7. Learned Claims Tribunal has assessed the monthly income of deceased Prakash Kumar Kanwar to be Rs.7,800/- per month, 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 5 deceased should be Rs.8,860/- per month, which comes to Rs. 1,06,320/- per annum. 8. 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:- Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court Income as per minimum wages Rs. 7,800 x 12 = Rs. 93,600/- Rs. 8,860 x 12 = Rs. 1,06,320/- Add future prospects @ 40% Rs. 93,600 + Rs. 37,440 = Rs. 1,31,040/- Rs. 1,06,320 + Rs. 42,528 = Rs. 1,48,848/- Deduction of 1/2 towards personal expenses Rs. 1,31,040 – 65,520 = Rs.65,520/- Rs. 1,48,848 – 74,424 = Rs.74,424/- Multiplier of 18 Rs. 11,79,360/- Rs. 13,39,632/- Loss of parental consortium Rs. 44,000/- Rs. 44,000 x 2 = Rs.88,000/- Loss of Estate Rs. 16,500/- Rs. 16,500/- Funeral Expenses Rs. 16,500/- Rs. 16,500/- Total Rs. 12,56,360/- Rs. 14,60,632/- 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 6 9. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs. 12,56,360/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 14,60,632/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs. 12,56,360/-, the appellants are entitled for an additional amount of Rs. 2,04,272/-. The concerned respondent is directed to deposit the amount of compensation as enhanced by this Court within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 7% per annum from the date of filing of claim application before the Tribunal till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. 10. Accordingly, this appeal is partly allowed and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Ashok