1 2025:CGHC:55695 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 827 of 2019 1- Mayavati Gaharvariya W/o Late Ramkeshwar Aged About 34 Years R/o Village - Parasdiha, Tahsil - Wadrafnagar, District Balrampur At Present Address Village Goverdhanpur, Harijanpara, Tahsil - Pratappur, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh. 2- Hemant S/o Late Ramkeshwar Aged About 19 Years R/o Village - Parasdiha, Tahsil - Wadrafnagar, District Balrampur At Present Address Village Goverdhanpur, Harijanpara, Tahsil - Pratappur, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh. 3- Sumant Gaharvariya S/o Late Ramkeshwar Aged About 17 Years (Now Aged About 18 Years), R/o Village - Parasdiha, Tahsil - Wadrafnagar, District Balrampur At Present Address Village Goverdhanpur, Harijanpara, Tahsil - Pratappur, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh. 4- Shyamkunwar W/o Kamal @ Kamal Ram Aged About 60 Years R/o Village - Parasdiha, Tahsil - Wadrafnagar, District Balrampur At Present Address Village Goverdhanpur, Harijanpara, Tahsil - Pratappur, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh. 5- Kamal @ Kamal Ram S/o Mohan Aged About 62 Years R/o Village - Parasdiha, Tahsil - Wadrafnagar, District Balrampur At Present Address Village Goverdhanpur, Harijanpara, Tahsil - Pratappur, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh. 6- Sita Devi W/o Ramesh Khaira Aged About 18 Years R/o Village - Parasdiha, Tahsil - Wadrafnagar, District Balrampur At Present Address Village Goverdhanpur, Harijanpara, Tahsil - Pratappur, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh. (Claimants), ... Appellants versus 1 - Rajendra Kumar Dubey S/o Ramji Dubey Aged About 47 Years Occupation - Driver Resident Of Village And Post - Bartikala, Tahsil Wadrafnagar, District Balrampur Chhattisgarh. (Vehicle Driver), District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Ranjit Khaira S/o Budhan Khaira Aged About 45 Years R/o Village - Digitally signed by NADIM MOHLE 2 Parasdiha, Post - Bartikala, Tahsil - Wadrafnagar, District Balrampur Chhattisgarh. (Vehicle Owner), District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Branch Manager Ifco Tokyo General Insurance Company Limited, Ring Road No. 1, M.S. Silver Plaza Second Floor Shop No. 205, Post - Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Appellants : Mr. Krishna Kumar Prajapati, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. D. N. Prajapati, Advocate For Respondent No.2 For other Respondents No. 1 & 2 : : Ms. Prachi Diwan, Advocate None Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment on Board 14/11/2025 1. The claimants/appellants have filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 for enhancement of compensation against award dated 06.07.2018 passed in Claim Case No. 14/2018, whereby the learned Tribunal granted compensation to the tune of Rs. 8,76,400/- with interest @ 6 % per annum on account of death of Ramkeshwar. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant would argue that on 31.12.2017, at about 6:30 pm, the deceased was dashed by respondent No.1 by driving the offending vehicle Sonalika Tractor (CG-29-A-3195) rashly and negligently, resultantly, the deceased-Ramkeshwar sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the injuries. He would contend that the age of the deceased was 35 years and earning Rs. 400 per day as he 3 was working as Mason. He would contend that the claimants, who are widow, younger sister, children and parents of the deceased filed claim case. He would contend that the learned Tribunal has assessed notional income of the deceased Rs. 4,500/- per month which is at lower side. He would submit that the deceased was mason and the claimants have proved this fact by leading oral evidence. 3. Learned Tribunal should have treated the deceased as unskilled labourer in absence of cogent evidence while assessing his income. He would further contend that minimum wages admissible to a skilled labouer in the month of December, 2017 was Rs. 10,530/- and the learned Tribunal should have taken this figure while assessing the notional income of the deceased. He would further contend that the learned Tribunal has not awarded compensation for loss of consortium to claimant No. 2 to 6. He would pray to enhance the compensation accordingly. 4. The learned Tribunal has fastened the liability with the Insurance company but despite service of notice, there is no representation on behalf of Insurance Company. 5. On the other hand, Ms. Prachi Diwan, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 would oppose the submission made by counsel for the appellants and submit that the learned Tribunal has granted just and proper compensation. She would argue that the offending vehicle was insured with the insurance company therefore, the learned Tribunal has fastened the liability with it. Thus, the appeal deserves to be dismissed. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 4 7. Admittedly, the age of the deceased was 35 years and he was a Mason. The claimant AW/1 Mayawati in her evidence has categorically stated that her husband was a mason and he was earning Rs. 400 per day. The Insurance Company could not rebut the said piece of evidence. The notional income has been assessed by the learned Tribunal @ Rs. 4,500/- which appears to be at lower side looking to the minimum wages matrix admissible in the month of December, 2017, which was Rs. 10,530/-. 8. Further, the learned Tribunal has not awarded compensation for loss of consortium to claimants No. 2 to 6. 9. With regard to deduction, the learned Tribunal has wrongly deducted 1/3rd towards personal expenses whereas appropriate deduction should be 1/4th as there are 6 dependents. 10. Taking into consideration the above discussed facts, the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal requires reconsideration and same is being revisited as under:- Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded by Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1. Income Rs.4,500 x 12 = 54,000 10,530 x 12 = 1,26,360/- 2. Deduction 1/3rd = 54,000 – 18,000 = 36,000/- 1/4th = 1,26,360 – 31590 = 94,770/- 3. Multiplier 16 = 5,76,000 /- 16 = 15,16,320/- 4. Future Prospect 40% = 8,06,400/- 40 % = 15,16,320 + 6,06,528 = 21,22,848/- 5 5. Loss of Estate 15,000 15,000 6. Funeral expenses 15,000 15,000 7. Loss of Consortium 40,000 48,000 x 5 + 40,000 = 2,80,000 Total 8,76,400 24,32,848 Final Compensation 24,32,848 – 8,76,400 Rs. 15,56,448/- 11. In view of the above calculation, the claimants shall be entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 15,56,448/-. The Insurance Company is directed to pay the enhanced amount of Rs. 15,56,448/-, with interest @ 6% per annum, to the appellants/claimants within a period of 60 days. The remaining terms and conditions of the award shall remain intact. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part. Sd/- Rakesh Mohan Pandey JUDGE Nadim