1 2025:CGHC:54947 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 339 of 2019  Shrimati Sharda Wd/o Late Gaukaran Vaishnav Aged About 20 Years D/o Chintamani Vaishanav At Present R/o Dhabpara, Police Station Nandghat Tehsil Nawagarh District Bemetara Chhattisgarh., District : Bemetara, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus 1. Dashrath Vaishnav S/o Ishwardas Vaishnav Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Hasda Police Station Bhatapara Village District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. (Respondent No. 1 To 3 Are Claimants) 2. Lila Bai Vaishanav W/o Dashrath Vaishanav Aged About 48 Years R/o Village Hasda Police Station Bhatapara Village District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. (Respondent No. 1 To 3 Are Claimants) 3. Tikeshwar S/o Dashrath Vaishnav Aged About 18 Years R/o Village Hasda Police Station Bhatapara Village District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. (Respondent No. 1 To 3 Are Claimants) 4. Digvijay Singh S/o Shri Ram Nayan Singh Aged About 24 Years R/o Semariya Police Station Latehar ,district Latehar (Jharkhand) At Present R/o Boston Carrier ,t.P. Nagar Korba ,police Station Kotwali (Korba) District Korba Chhattisgarh.(Driver) 5. Ali Ahamed S/o Late Mohammad Isriel Aged About 40 Years R/o 780 ,moti House Gali Pasa Bhata ,balco Ward No. 32, Korba Police Station Balco Nagar ,district Korba Chhattisgarh(Owner ) 6. New Indian Insurance Company Limited Division Officer Sada Complex Transport Nagar ,korba ,district Korba Chhattisgarh (Insurance Company) ... Respondent(s) For Appellant : Mr. Shobhit Koshta, Advocate For Respondents No. 1 to 3 : Mr. Deepak Jain, Advocate For Respondent No. 6 : Ms. Pooja Yadav, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. Shivendu Pandya, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 11.11 .2025 SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Digitally signed by SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Date: 2025.11.13 14:20:53 +0530 2 1. This appeal has been preferred by the widow of the deceased against award passed by the learned Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhatapara in Claim Case No. H-33/2015 dated 02.11.2018, whereby the learned Tribunal has passed an award to the tune of Rs. 10,78,000/- with interest at the rate of 9% per anum on account of death of Gaukaran Vaishnav. 2. The claimants were parents and younger brother and widow was respondent. The claimants filed claim application inter alia on the ground that the deceased Gaukaran Vaishnav aged about 22 years met with an accident on 07.07.2015, at about 3 pm as driver of the Truck bearing registration No. CG 12 S 2606 dashed his motorcycle, consequently, he sustained injuries and died on the spot. The claimants pleaded that the deceased was an employee of Pulse Mill and earning Rs. 9,000/- per month. The claimants claimed a sum of Rs. 11,50,000/-. The driver and owner as well as Insurance company filed their reply and denied contents of claim petition. The learned Tribunal framed issues; parties led evidence, and thereafter, award was passed. The learned Tribunal granted compensation to the tune of Rs. 50,000 - 50,000/- to the father and younger brother of the deceased and rest of award amount was apportioned 50:50 between mother and widow of the deceased. 3. Mr. Shobhit Koshta, Advocate appearing for the appellant/widow of the deceased would argue that the learned Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased Rs. 5,000/- per month, which is at lower side looking to the minimum wages matrix. He would further submit that the learned Tribunal has awarded loss of consortium Rs. 40,000/- only. He would contend that as the number of dependents are 4, the learned Tribunal ought to have awarded Rs. 40,000/- each. He would further contend that in the month of 3 July, 2015 the minimum wages payable to an unskilled labourer was Rs. 5,787/- and the learned Tribunal ought to have taken that figure to compute compensation. He would also contend that the appellant/widow was aged about 20 years on the date of death of her husband and her mother was aged about 48 years. It is contended that the father of the deceased is still alive and there are four elder brothers of the deceased, who are taking care of mother of the deceased, and therefore, the learned Tribunal committed an error of law while making apportionment of the compensation 50:50 between widow and mother of the deceased. It is further contended that looking to the age of the appellant/widow of the deceased, and nature of dependency, the learned Tribunal ought to have apportioned the compensation by 80:20 between widow and mother. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for respondents would oppose. Mr. Deepak Jain would submit that the deceased alone was earning member of the family and the claimants were dependent on his income. He would further submit that at present age of the mother of the deceased is 60 years and father of the deceased has crossed the age of 60 years, therefore, he is not able to maintain his wife and children and on this count, the learned Tribunal apportioned the amount of compensation 50:50 between the mother and the widow. He would contend that the instant appeal deserves to be dismissed. 5. Ms. Pooja Yadav, Advocate appearing for the Insurance company would submit that the learned Tribunal has granted just and proper compensation and appeal deserves to be dismissed. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 4 7. The deceased was aged about 22 years on the date of accident and he was an employee of Pulse Mill but the claimants could not lead evidence to prove income of deceased, and therefore, the learned Tribunal ought to have applied minimum wages matrix to assess the monthly income of the deceased. According to minimum wages matrix prevalent in the State of Chhattisgarh in the month of July, 2015, the minimum wages admissible to unskilled labourer was Rs. 5,787/-. Further, the learned Tribunal awarded compensation for loss of consortium to one of the claimants, whereas, two other members are also entitled to get compensation on this head. 8. With regard to apportionment, at the time of death of Gaukaran Vaishnav, the age of the widow was 20 years, whereas, age of the mother was 48 years. Father, 4 brothers and 2 sisters of the deceased are alive; therefore, it cannot be presumed that the mother was totally financially dependent on the deceased, whereas, the widow was totally dependent on the income of the deceased; therefore, the learned Tribunal committed an error of law while making apportionment of compensation between widow and mother 50:50. In my opinion, the amount awarded by the learned Tribunal should be apportioned at the ratio of 70:30 between widow and mother. The learned Tribunal has awarded Rs. 50,000 - 50,000/- to father and younger brother of the deceased, which does not require interference. 9. Taking into consideration 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 amount of compensation 5 requires reconsideration and same is being revisited herein-below :- Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded by Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1. Income Rs. 5,000 x12 = Rs. 60,000/- Rs. 5,787/- x12 = Rs. 69,444/- 2. Future Prospect (40%) = Rs. 24,000/- (40%) = Rs. 27,778/- 3. Deduction (-) 1/3 Rs. 28,000/- Rs. 56,000/- (-) 1/3 Rs. 32,407/- Rs. 64,815/- 4. Multiplier (x) 18 = Rs. 10,08,000/- (x) 18 = Rs. 11,66,670/- 5. Loss of Estate Rs. 15000/- Rs. 15000/- 6. Funeral expenses Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 15,000/- 7. Loss of consortium (for claimant No. 1) Rs. 40,000/- Rs. 40,000/- 8. Loss of consortium(for claimant No. 2) Rs. 48,000/- 9. Loss of consortium(for claimant No. 3) Rs. 48,000/- TOTAL Rs. 10,78,000/- Rs. 13,32,670/- 10. For the forgoing reasons, the appeal is allowed in part. The amount of compensation of Rs. 10,78,000/- awarded by the tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 13,32,670/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs. 10,78,000/-, the claimants including widow/appellant are held entitled for an additional amount of Rs. 2,54,670/- with interest at the rate of 9%. The Insurance company is directed to deposit enhanced amount of compensation within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Further, the amount awarded shall be apportioned 6 between the widow and the mother in ratio of 70:30 respectively. Rest of the part of the impugned award shall remain intact. 11. Accordingly, the instant appeal is hereby partly allowed. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge $iddhant