1 (MAC No. 139 of 2022) 2025:CGHC:46244 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 139 of 2022 1 - Rathram Bareth S/o Late Shri Baldau Prasad Bareth, Aged About 24 Years R/o Sioni, P.S. Champa, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh. 2 - Sonam @ Lata Bareth D/o Shri Rathram Bareth, Aged About 2 Years Minor Through Natural Guardian Father Rathram Bareth R/o Sioni, P.S. Champa, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh. --- Appellant(s) versus 1 - Ravi Suryavanshi S/o Dilip Kumar Suryavanshi Aged About 21 Years R/o Badrapara, Sioni, P.S. Champa, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh. 2 - Shriram Bareth S/o Shri Jhaduram Bareth, R/o Darang, P.S. And Tahsil Champa, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh. 3 - Icici Lombard General Ins. Co. Ltd., Commercial Building, Devendra Nagar Road, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from the Case Information System) For Appellants :- Mr. Hanuman Prasad Agrawal, Advocate For Respondent No.3. :- Mr. Shobhit Mishra, Advocate ADITI DIWAN KAIWART Digitally signed by ADITI DIWAN KAIWART Date: 2025.09.11 11:34:51 +0530 2 (MAC No. 139 of 2022) SB - Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment on Board 10.09.2025 1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “Act of 1988”) has been preferred by the appellants/claimants seeking enhancement of the amount of compensation, challenging impugned award dated 25.10.2021 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Janjgir, District Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh in Claim Case No.57/2020, whereby an amount of Rs. 12,86,600/- has been awarded as compensation for the death of Anita Bareth, aged about 22 years. 2. Appellants, who are husband and minor child of deceased Anita Bareth, filed an application under Section 166 of the Act of 1988 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for brevity “Claims Tribunal”) seeking compensation to the tune of Rs. 95,72,000/- pleading therein that on the date of accident, deceased Anita Bareth was aged about 22 years and was earning 15,000/- per month by sewing and stitching and on account of her untimely death in the accident, the appellants have suffered loss of love and affection. 3 (MAC No. 139 of 2022) 3. Learned Claims Tribunal, upon appreciation of pleadings and evidence placed on record by the respective parties, held that deceased Anita Bareth died in the accident arising out of rash & negligent driving of the offending vehicle driven by respondent No.1, owned by respondent No.2 and insured by respondent No.3. Breach of conditions of insurance policy was not found to be proved and after calculating the amount of compensation, the learned Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.12,86,600/- as total compensation with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of claim application. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants would submit that learned Claims Tribunal has awarded meager amount, as the Claims Tribunal erred in assessing income of the deceased as Rs.6,000/- per month, whereas the deceased used to earn Rs. 15,000/- per month by performing the work of sewing and stitching. Also, proper compensation has not been awarded for loss of consortium as well as loss of state. Therefore, the instant appeal be allowed and the amount of compensation awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal be suitably enhanced. 5. Learned counsel for the insurance company/respondent No.3 would submit that the appellants have failed to prove 4 (MAC No. 139 of 2022) the exact income of deceased by producing clinching and admissible piece of evidence, hence, the learned Claims Tribunal is justified in assessing income of the deceased on notional basis. The amount of compensation awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal is just and proper, which does not call for any interference. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and gone through the records with utmost circumspection. 7. Learned Claims Tribunal assessed the monthly income of deceased Anita Bareth to be Rs.6,000/- per month, however, in the opinion of this Court, as per the Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the office of Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh for unskilled labour, the monthly income of the deceased should be Rs.8,600/- per month, which comes to Rs. 1,03,200/- per annum. 8. Thus, in light of the aforesaid discussion and in light of the judgments of the Supreme Court rendered in the matters of National Insurance Company Ltd. V. Pranay Sethi1, Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 5 (MAC No. 139 of 2022) Corporation & Ors2 and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors 3 , this Court is computing the compensation as below:- Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court Income as per minimum wages Rs. 6,000 x 12 = Rs. 72,000/- Rs. 8,600 x 12 = Rs. 1,03,200/- Future prospects @ 40% Rs. 72,000 + 28,800 = Rs.1,00,800/- Rs.1,03,200+ 41,280 = Rs. 1,44,480/- Deduction of 1/3 Rs. 1,00,800 – 33,600 = Rs.67,200/- Rs.1,44,480 – 48,160 = Rs.96,320/- Multiplier of 18 Rs.67,200/- x 18 = Rs.12,09,600/- Rs.96,320/- x 18 = Rs. 17,33,760/- Loss of Estate, Consortium, Funeral Expenses Rs. 44,000/- + Rs. 16,500/- + Rs. 16,500/- = Rs. 77,000/- Rs. 44,000/- + Rs. 44,000/- + Rs. 16,500/- + Rs. 16,500/- = Rs. 1,21,000/- Total Rs. 12,86,600/- Rs. 18,54,760/- 9. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs. 12,86,600/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 18,54,760/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs. 12,86,600/-, the appellants are entitled for an additional amount of Rs.5,68,160/-. The concerned respondent is directed to deposit the 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 6 (MAC No. 139 of 2022) amount of compensation as enhanced by this Court within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of claim application before the Tribunal till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. 10. Accordingly, this appeal is partly allowed and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. 11. Let a certified copy of this order be transmitted to the concerned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal for necessary information and action, if any. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge @d!t!