1 2025:CGHC:48663 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1962 of 2018 1 - The Oriental Insurance Company Limited Divisional Manager Division Officer G.E. Road Parmanand Bhawan ,durg ,police Station Mohan Nagar Durg ,tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus 1 - (Deleted ) Smt. Kumari Bai As Per Honble Court Order Dated 21-04- 2025 2 - Kumesh Kumar S/o Late Thakurram Sahu Aged About 31 Years R/o Wand No. 12 ,kalangpur ,tahsil Gunderdehi District Balod Chhattisgarh., District : Balod, Chhattisgarh 3 - Khomlal S/o Late Thakurram Sahu Aged About 27 Years R/o Wand No. 12 ,kalangpur ,tahsil Gunderdehi District Balod Chhattisgarh., District : Balod, Chhattisgarh 4 - Posendra Kumar S/o Late Thkurram Sahu Aged About 26 Years R/o Wand No. 12 ,kalangpur ,tahsil Gunderdehi District Balod Chhattisgarh., District : Balod, Chhattisgarh 5 - Emmanual Nanda S/o S.D. Nanda Aged About 56 Years R/o Village Christan Hospital ,naya Bus Stand Dhamtari ,tahsil And District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh. (Owner), District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh VISHAKHA BEOHAR Digitally signed by VISHAKHA BEOHAR 2 6 - Dhamtari Christiyan Hospital Suprintendent Throough Dr. Sandeep Patauda Christiyan Hospital ,naya Bus Stand Dhamtari Distict Dhamtari Chhattisgarh. (Driver), District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from the Case Information System) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Appellant :- Mr. Raj Awasthi, Advocate For Respondent No. 6 :- Ms. Ruchi Nagar, Advocate ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order On Board 22.09.2025 1. This appeal is by the Appellant/Insurance Company against the award dated 25.08.2018 passed by the First Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Balod, C.G. in Claim Case No.23/2018 awarding total compensation of Rs.33,03,189/- with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of application till realization while fastening liability on the non-applicants No.1 to 3 jointly and severely. The Tribunal further held that the primary liability to pay compensation to the claimants would rest with non-applicant No.3, i.e., the Insurance Company. 2. As per claim petition, on 02.01.2018, deceased- Thakur Ram Sahu, aged about 56 years, earning Rs.35,000/- per month by working as Head Accountant Clerk, died in the motor vehicular accident caused due to rash and negligent driving of vehicle Bolero bearing registration No.CG05-D-0813 (hereinafter called as ‘offending vehicle’) by non-applicant No.2/non-applicant No.2. 3 At the time of accident, the offending vehicle was owned by non- applicant No.1 and insured with non-applicant No.3/Insurance Company. 3. On claim petition being filed by the claimants under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act seeking compensation to the tune of Rs.38,50,000/- under various heads, the Tribunal considering the evidence led by both the parties passed an award as mentioned above. 4. The sole ground urged by learned counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company is that the Tribunal wrongly deducted ¼ towards the personal and living expenses of the deceased, whereas 1/3 should have been deducted, considering the dependency on the deceased and in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in Smt. Sarla Verma and others v. Delhi Transport Corporation and another, (2009) 6 SCC 121. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent No.6 supports the impugned award and submits that the Tribunal considering all the relevant aspects of the matters has rightly awarded compensation which needs no interference by this Court. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. So far as the deduction towards the personal and living expenses of the deceased is concerned, the Tribunal erred in deducting ¼ towards personal and living expenses of the deceased. In view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Smt. Sarla Verma 4 (supra) and considering that there are three dependents, the deduction should have been 1/3. Therefore, the appropriate deduction in this case would be 1/3 towards the personal and living expenses of the deceased, instead of 1/4. 8. In this way, the claimants/respondent No.2 to 4 are entitled to get compensation in the following manner:- Sl. No. Heads Calculation (in rupees) 01. Income of the deceased Rs.4,56,028/- per annum (as determined by the Tribunal) 02. 15% of (i) above to be added towards future prospects. Rs.68,404/- (Rs.4,56,028/- + Rs.68,404/- = Rs.5,24,432/-) 03. 1/3 deduction towards personal and living expenses of the deceased Rs.1,74,810/- (Rs.5,24,432/- - Rs.1,74,810/- = Rs.3,49,622/- 04. Multiplier of 9 to be applied Rs.3,49,622/- x 9 =Rs.31,46,598/- 05. Towards conventional heads Rs.2,25,000/- Total compensation Rs.33,71,598/- 9. Now the claimants/respondent Nos. 2 to 4 are entitled for compensation of Rs.33,71,598/- in place of Rs.33,03,189/- as awarded by the Tribunal. However, rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. 10. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part. sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Vishakha