1 2025:CGHC:31844 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 163 of 2019 1 - Rekhram @ Bholaram Sahu S/o Lt. Phoolsingh Sahu Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Sher, Post Kanekera, Police Station, Tahsil And District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh, District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh 2 - Smt. Savitri Bai Sahu W/o Rekhram @ Bholaram Sahu Aged About 38 Years R/o Village Sher, Post Kanekera, Police Station, Tahsil And District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh, District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh 3 - Minor Ku. Indu Sahu D/o Rekhram @ Bholaram Sahu Aged About 11 Years (Appellant No. 3 Being Minor On Behalf Of Through Her Legal Guardian Father Rekhram @ Bholaram Sahu Appellant No. 1) R/o Village Sher, Post Kanekera, Police Station, Tahsil And District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh, District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh ... Appellants Versus 1 - Pavan Kumar Sahu S/o Vishnu Sahu Aged About 36 Years R/o Village Sher, Post Kanekera, Police Station, Tahsil And District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh (Driver Of Vehicle Tractor Bearing Registration No. Cg 04 D 0373), District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh 2 - Omkar Prasad Sahu S/o Jagat Ram Sahu Aged About 41 Years R/o Village Sher, Post Kanekera, Police Station, Tahsil And District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh (Registered Owner Of Vehicle Tractor Bearing Registration No. Cg 04 D 0373), District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh 3 - The Branch Manager, The United India Insurance Company Limited, Through The Branch Manager, Branch Office, Vivek Vardhan Sewa Ashram Complex, Shop No. 07, Nai Mandi Road, Mahasamund, Police Station, Tahsil And District SHUBHAM DEY Digitally signed by SHUBHAM DEY 2 Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh (Insurer Of Vehicle Tractor Bearing Registration No. Cg 04 D 0373), District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Appellants : Mr. Shivendu Pandya, Advocate For Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Kripesh G. Kela, Advocate For Respondent No. 3 : Mr. Pravesh Sahu, Advocate on behalf of Mr. P.R. Patankar, Advocate S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order On Board 10/07/2025 1. This appeal is filed by the appellant seeking enhancement of the amount of compensation awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal in its award dated 14.05.2018 passed by the 1st Additional/Upper Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Mahasamund, District - Mahasamund (C.G.) in Claim Case No. H-63/2017 whereby, the learned Claims Tribunal allowed the application in part and awarded a sum of Rs. 2,75,000/- against the death of a child aged about 8 years. 2. Facts of the case in brief are that, on 04.03.2017, when Dagesh Sahu (minor) was playing beside the road at Village Sher at around 02:00 P.M., at that time, the offending Tractor bearing Registration No. CG 04 D 0373 which was being driven by the Respondent No. 1 in a rash and negligent manner, dashed Dagesh Sahu and caused accident. In the accident Dagesh Sahu suffered grievous injuries and died. Subsequent to the said accident, an FIR was lodged bearing Crime No. 128/2017, P.S. Mahasamund, District – Mahasamund for the offences punishable under Section 279, 304A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 3. The applicants/claimants have filed their claim application before the learned Claims Tribunal pleading that the deceased child i.e. Dagesh Sahu on the date of accident was 08 years old and studying in Class – II. The applicants/claimants being the parents and minor sister of the 3 deceased have claimed compensation of Rs. 12,20,000/- from the non- applicants before the learned Claims Tribunal. 4. The Non-Applicants No. 1 & 2 submitted reply denying the pleadings of claim application and pleaded that the accident was not caused by the offending Tractor bearing CG NO. 04 D 0373. It was pleaded that on the date of accident, the vehicle was insured with the Non-Applicant No. 3 and therefore, if the Tribunal records a finding that the offending vehicle was involved in the said accident, then the liability to satisfy the amount of compensation is upon the Non-Applicant No. 3/Insurance Company. 5. The Non-Applicant No. 3 opposing the pleadings made by the applicants/claimants in the claim application have submitted reply pleading that Non-Applicant No. 1 was not possessing valid and effective driving license, there was no permit as such, the vehicle was driven in breach of conditions of insurance policy. The said accident occurred due to the negligence of the minor child and therefore, Non- Applicant No. 3 is not liable to satisfy the amount of compensation 6. Learned counsel for appellant submits that the learned Claims Tribunal erred in awarding compensation of Rs. 2,75,000/- only against the death of an 08 year old child. He submits that according to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kishan Gopal & Anr. Vs. Lala & Ors. reported in 2014 (1) SCC 244, learned Claims Tribunal ought to have awarded Rs. 5,00,000/- as compensation to the appellant/claimants. He further relies upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kusmi Devi Vs. Md. Kasim and Anr. reported in 2023 () TAC 17 (SC) and contended that in addition to lump sum compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/-, the appellants are also entitled for 4 a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- as global enhancement. He further submits that as the liability to satisfy the amount of compensation is upon the Respondents No. 3/Insurance Company. Therefore, the case be heard finally at the motion stage. 7. Learned counsel for the respective respondents do not dispute the submission of the counsel for the appellant with regard to fastening of liability upon the Respondent No. 3/Insurance Company to satisfy amount of compensation. They further oppose the submission on the prayer made for enhancement of the amount of compensation. It is argued that the amount of compensation awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal is just and proper and does not call for any interference. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and and also perused the record of the claim case as also, the miscellaneous appeal. 9. The death of a child aged about 8 years in a motor accident is not in dispute. The Respondent No. 3 is insurer of the ill-fated vehicle and the liability fastened upon the Respondent No. 3 is also not in dispute. 10. The date of accident is 04.03.2017. The application seeking compensation is filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. 11. In the matter of Kishan Gopal (Supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court considering its earlier decision in the matter of Lata Wadhwa v. State of Bihar reported in (2001) 8 SCC 197 awarded an amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- as compensation by assessing income of deceased on notional basis as Rs.30,000/- p.a. on the ground that the rupee value has come down drastically from the year 1994. In the matter of Lata Wadhwa (Supra) it was observed by Hon'ble Supreme Court that though in case of 5 death of a child on account of injuries suffered in a motor vehicular accident, compensation could not be awarded by assessing income of child on notional basis and applying multiplier, but at the same time it is to be kept in mind that loss of a child cannot be equated in terms of money and therefore some reasonable amount of compensation should be awarded to the parents. Further, the parents would also be entitled for compensation towards loss of estate. 12. Similarly, in the case of Meena Devi Vs. Nunu Chand Mahto @ Menchand Mahto & Ors. reported in (2023) 1 SCC 204 considered the death of a 12 year child and reiterated and applied the ratio laid down in the case of Kishan Gopal (Supra) has awarded a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- by adopting the income and multiplier as applied by the learned Claims Tribunal case of Kishan Chand (Supra). 13. Recently, in case of Kusmi (Supra), Hon’ble Supreme Court while dealing with grant of compensation in case of death of child, granted a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- as a global enhancement. Relevant paragraphs of the judgment passed by Hon'ble the Apex Court in Kusmi (Supra) are as under:- 14. "3. In respect of the death of a three years old child in the accident which occurred on 25.08.1994, the Motors Accidents Claims Tribunal (For short 'MACT") through its Award dated 13.02.2015 had granted the compensation of Rs. 1,50,000/- with interest @ 9% per annum. The High Court through its judgment dated 13.12.2018 has enhanced it to a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- as a global compensation. 15. 4. In a matter of the present nature where the regular parameters of determining the compensation cannot be considered due to the uncertainties in life of a child and as held by this Court, the lump sum compensation is being awarded. Without prejudice to the contentions all the parties and in the 6 interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to grant a further sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as global enhancement which shall be deposited by the respondent No.2-Insurance Company before the MACT concerned within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, whereupon the amount shall be disbursed to the claimant." 16. A bare reading of above decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Kusmi (Supra) would show that the compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/- granted by the High Court in case of death of three years old child in a road traffic accident, Hon’ble Supreme Court has granted a further sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as a global enhancement. Meaning thereby, Hon'ble Supreme Court held that total global compensation for the death of a three year old child is Rs.6,00,000/-. 17. Considering the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kishan Gopal (Supra) and Meena Devi (Supra) and Kusmi (Supra), wherein Hon’ble Supreme Court has awarded a sum of Rs. 6,00,000/- as global compensation against the death of a minor child aged about 03 years and considering the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the age of the child to be 08 years, in the opinion of this Court, learned Claims Tribunal erred in awarding the amount of compensation as Rs. 2,75,000/- in total to the appellant/claimant which is not sustainable in the eyes of law. 18. Accordingly, the amount of compensation computed by the learned Claims Tribunal as Rs. 2,75,000/- is enhanced to Rs. 6,00,000/-. Now the appellant/claimant shall be entitled for the amount of compensation to the tune of Rs. 6,00,000/-. The amount of compensation shall carry interest at the rate of 7% per annum from the date of application till its realization. Rest of the conditions mentioned in the impugned award shall remain intact. 7 19. Any amount already paid to Claimants/Appellants as compensation shall be adjusted from the total amount of compensation as calculated above. 20. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part and the impugned award stands modified to the extent indicated above. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/-Sd/--/-/--------/--/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Dey