1 2025:CGHC:48774 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 2238 of 2019 1. Fulbai Sidar W/o Late Vishram Sidar Aged About 33 Years R/o Village Laladhruw Bhatha Post Gudeli Thana Sarangarh District Raigarh Chhattisgarh. Hall Mukam Village Kirari Thana Masturi District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 2. Ganeshi Sidar S/o Late Vishram Sidar Aged About 15 Years Through Legal Guardian Mother Fulbai Sidar W/o Late Vishram Sidar, R/o Village Laladhruw Bhatha Post Gudeli Thana Sarangarh District Raigarh Chhattisgarh. Hall Mukam Village Kirari Thana Masturi District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 3. Nanhu Dai Sidar W/o Baratu Sidar Aged About 70 Years R/o Village Laladhruw Bhatha Post Gudeli Thana Sarangarh District Raigarh Chhattisgarh. Hall Mukam Village Kirari Thana Masturi District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant(s) versus 1. Vijay Lal Miri S/o Jagatram Miri Aged About 43 Years R/o New Mohalla In Front Of Garden Jagatpur District Raigarh Chhattisgarh (Owner Cum Driver Of The Offending Vehicle Veganar No C.G.13/c/3514)...(Owner Cum Driver), District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 2. Ifko Tokyo General Insurance Company Limited Through Branch Manager , Branch Office Galaxy Heights 1st Floor Near - I.C.I.C.I. Bank Byapar Vihar Road Bilaspur Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh...(Insurer Of The Offending Vehicle Veganar No. C.G. 13/c./3514)..(Insurer), District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Appellants/Claimants : Ms. Shalini Jangde, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. Arjun Lal Singroul, Advocate For Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Pravesh Sahu, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. P.R. Patankar, Advocate For Respondent No. 1 : None. Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 23. 09.2025 2 1. The appellants have filed this appeal for enhancement of compensation against award passed by the Second Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur in Claim Case No. 424/2019 dated 10.10.2019, whereby the learned Tribunal has passed an award to the tune of Rs. 11,45,200/- with interest at the rate of 6% per anum. 2. Facts of the present case are that on 16.03.2019, the driver of the offending car bearing registration No. CG 13 C 3514, driving it rashly and negligently dashed the deceased, who sustained grievous injuries and died. The claimants who are wife, minor child and mother of the deceased filed claim case under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act inter alia on the ground that at the time of death, age of the deceased was 34 years and he was working as Mason and earning Rs. 15,000/- per month. The respondents filed their reply. The learned Tribunal framed issues, accordingly passed award. 3. Ms. Shalini Jangde, Advocate appearing for the appellants would submit that the learned Tribunal has assessed notional income of the deceased Rs. 6,000/- per month, whereas, he was a Mason and according to the minimum wages notification issued by the Labour Commissioner, Raipur, the minimum wage payable to a skilled labour in the month of March, 2019 was Rs. 9,570/-. She would further submit that the learned Tribunal has not granted loss of consortium to the child and mother of the deceased. She would pray to enhance the compensation. 4. On the other hand, Mr. Pravesh Sahu, Advocate appearing for the Insurance company would oppose. He would submit that the learned Tribunal has passed just and proper award and the instant appeal deserves to be dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3 6. Considering the fact that the learned Tribunal has considered the income of the deceased at lower side, whereas, minimum wages payable to skilled labour in the month of March, 2019 was Rs. 9,570/-, thus, it can safely be held that the learned Tribunal has assessed notional income of the deceased at lower side. Further, the learned Tribunal has not awarded compensation for loss of consortium to the child, and mother of the deceased. 7. Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, material available on record and in the light of judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of National Insurance Company Ltd. V. Pranay Sethi, reported in 2017 (16) SCC 680, Sarla Verma & Ors Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Ors. reported in 2009(6) SCC 121 and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. V. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors. reported in 2018 (18) SCC 130, the compensation is being revisited herein-below:- Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded by Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1. Income Rs. 6,000 x12 = Rs. 72,000/- Rs. 9,570 x12 = Rs. 1,14,840/- 2. Future Prospect (40%) = Rs. 28,800/- (40%) = Rs. 45,936/- 3. Deduction (-) 1/3 Rs. 33,600/- Rs. 67,200/- (-) 1/3 Rs. 30,000/- Rs. 53,592/- 4. Multiplier (x) 16 = Rs. 10,75,200/- (x) 16 = Rs. 17,14,944/- 5. Loss of Estate Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 15,000/- 6. Funeral expenses Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 15,000/- 7. Loss of Spousal Consortium (for appellant No. 1) Rs. 40,000/- Rs. 40,000/- 4 8. Loss of Parental Consortium(for appellant No. 2) NIL Rs. 48,000/- 9. Loss of Filial Consortium(for appellant No. 3) NIL Rs. 48,000/- TOTAL Rs. 11,45,200/- Rs. 18,80,944/- 8. For the forgoing reasons, the appeal is allowed in part. The amount of compensation of Rs. 11,45,200/- awarded by the tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 18,80,944/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs. 11,45,200/-, the appellants/claimants are held entitled for an additional amount of Rs.7,35,744/-. The Insurance company is directed to deposit the amount of compensation as enhanced by this Court within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Rest of the conditions of impugned award shall remain intact. 9.Accordingly, the instant appeal is hereby partly allowed. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge $iddhant