1 2025:CGHC:49283 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1922 of 2019 1 - Ajit Kumar S/o Late Jagdev Ram Aged About 26 Years R/o Village Das Dumartoli, Tahsil And District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Pradeep Ram S/o Late Jagdev Ram Aged About 24 Years R/o Village Das Dumartoli, Tahsil And District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Minor Deepika Bai D/o Late Jagdev Ram Aged About 13 Years Minor Through Her Mother Namely Larangi Bai, Appellant No. 4, R/o Village Das Dumartoli, Tahsil And District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Smt. Larangi Bai Wd/o Late Jagdev Ram Aged About 46 Years R/o Village Das Dumartoli, Tahsil And District : Jashpur Chhattisgarh. (Claimants) ... Appellants/Claimants Versus 1 - Rakesh Kumar Ekka S/o Shri Kamil Ekka Aged About 33 Years R/o Village Saarudhih, Tahsil And District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Branch Manager, The New India Insurance Company Limited, Local Branch Office - Judev Complex, Ghamarhiya Road, Jashpur, District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Appellant : Mr. Shrikant Kaushik, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. Rishi Kant Mahobia, Advocate For Respondent No. 1/Driver- cum-Owner For Respondent No. 2/ Insurance Company : : Mr. Arun Kumar Shukla, Advocate Mr. Azad Siddique, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment on Board 25/09/2025 1. The appellants/claimants have filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act for enhancement of compensation against the Digitally signed by RAMESH KUMAR VATTI Date: 2025.09.26 15:02:49 +0530 2 award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jashpur, District Jashpur (C.G.) in Claim Case No. 63/2018 dated 16.08.2019, whereby the learned Claims Tribunal has passed an award to the tune of Rs.6,78,000/- with interest @ 6% per annum and even if it is not deposited within 01 month, it shall not carry interest @ 9% per annum on account of death of Laljeet Ram. 2. As per claim petition, on 04.02.2018, the deceased, aged about 22 years, earning Rs.9,000/- per month as he was working in poultry-form, died in the motor vehicular accident caused due to rash and negligent driving of vehicle i.e. Tractor bearing registration No. CG-14/NF-6769 by respondent No.1/driver-cum-owner. 3. Mr. Shrikant Kaushik, learned counsel appearing for the appellants/claimants would submit that Laljeet Ram died in a motor accident on 04.02.2018. He would contend that claim case was by brothers, mother and minor sister of the deceased. He would further contend that the deceased was working in poultry-form and was earning Rs.9,000/- per month. He would submit that the learned Claims Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased was Rs.6,000/- per month at lower side, whereas as per minimum wages matrix, the wages admissible to unskilled labour in the month of February 2018 was Rs.7,930/-. He would further submit that the learned Claims Tribunal ought to have considered that figure while assessing the compensation. He would further contend that the learned Claims Tribunal has not awarded compensation for loss of consortium in favour of the mother and minor sister of the deceased. He would submit that no amount towards future prospect has been granted to the 3 claimants. He would pray to modify the award by enhancing the compensation. 4. On the other hand, Mr. Arun Kumar Shukla, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 1/Driver-Cum-Owner and Mr. Azad Siddique, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 2/Insurance Company would oppose. They would contend that the learned Claims Tribunal has passed just and proper compensation. They would further submit that the claimants failed to prove income of the deceased by leading clinching evidence, therefore, the learned Claims Tribunal assessed the notional income of the deceased at Rs.6,000/- per month. They would submit that this appeal deserves to be dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsels appearing for the respective parties and perused the record of the learned Claims Tribunal. 6. Admittedly, the age of the deceased at the time of accident was 20-22 years. The claimants could not prove the fact that the deceased was working in poultry-form and was earning Rs.9,000/- per month. The learned Claims Tribunal assessed the notional income of the deceased was Rs.6,000/- per month in absence of any evidence. In my opinion, the learned Claims Tribunal ought to have considered the notional income of the deceased applying the minimum wages matrix in absence of adequate evidence. Further the learned Claims Tribunal has not awarded compensation to mother and minor sister of the deceased for loss of consortium and no compensation towards future prospect. 7. Thus, in light of the aforesaid discussion and in light of the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in the matters of National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi, reported in (2017) 16 4 SCC 680; Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Ors., reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121 and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors., reported in (2018) 18 SCC 130, this Court is computing the compensation as below:- Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1. Income as per minimum wages Rs.6,000/- per month Rs.7,930/- 2. Future prospect 40% - Nil - Rs.3,172 + 7,930 = Rs.11,102/- 3. Deduction of 50% towards personal expenses Rs.6,000 – 3,000= Rs.3,000/- per month Rs.11,102 – 5,551 = Rs.5,551/- per month 4. Per month Income of the deceased Rs.3,000/- Rs.5,551/- 5. Annual Income of the deceased Rs.3,000/- x 12 = Rs.36,000/- per annum Rs.5,551 x 12 = Rs.66,612/- per annum 6. Multiplier of 18 Rs.36,000/- x 18 = Rs.6,48,000/- Rs.66,612/- x 18 = Rs.11,99,016/- 7. Funeral Expenses Rs.15,000/- Rs.15,000/- 8 Loss of Estate Rs.15,000/- Rs.15,000/- 9. Filial Consortium to Claimants No. 3 and 4 (minor sister and mother) as 40,000/- each - Nil - Rs.40,000/- + Rs.40,000/- Rs.80,000/- Rs.80,000/- + Rs.16,000/- as 20% amount Rs.96,000/- Total : Rs.6,78,000/- Rs.13,25,016/- 8. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs.6,78,000/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.13,25,016/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs.6,78,000/-, the appellants/claimants are entitled for an additional amount of Rs.6,47,016/-. The concerned respondent is directed to deposit the amount of compensation as enhanced by this Court within a period of 3 5 months 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 filing of claim application before the Tribunal till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. 9. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part with modification in the impugned award to the above extent. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge vatti