1 2025:CGHC:25150 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 134 of 2021 1. Smt. Rekhabai Kaushik W/o Lt. Purushottam Kaushik, Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Belmundi, P.S. Hirri, Tehsil Takhatpur, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh)...................Claimant, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 2. Ishant Kaushik, S/o Lt. Purushottam Kaushik, Aged About 9 Years Through Mother Smt. Rekha Bai Kaushik, R/o Village Belmundi, P.S. Hirri, Tehsil Takhatpur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh...........Claimant, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 3. Kumari Ishika Kaushik, D/o Lt. Purushottam Kaushik, Aged About 7 Years Through Mother Smt. Rekha Bai Kaushik, R/o Village Belmundi, P.S. Hirri, Tehsil Takhatpur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh...........Claimant, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 4. Smt. Pardeshin @ Paretan, W/o Derharam Kaushik Aged About 61 Years R/o Village Belmundi, P.S. Hirri, Tehsil Takhatpur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh...........Claimant, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 5. Derharam Kaushik, S/o Lt. Sukhram Kaushik, Aged About 70 Years R/o Village Belmundi, P.S. Hirri, Tehsil Takhatpur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh...........Claimant, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant(s) versus 1. The New India Insurance Company Limited Through Manager, Address Mandal Karyalay, 2nd Floor, Shriram Trade Centre, Infront Of Rajiv Plaza, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh), District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 2. Vinay Ram, S/o Saguni @ Sayuni Ram, Aged About 35 Years R/o Japla, P.S. Hussainabad, District Palamu Bihar, Hal Mukam- Shivshakti Kesar, Akaltara, District Janjgir Champa (Chhattisgarh).............(Vehile Driver), District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh 2 3. Roshan Singh, S/o Birendra Kumar Singh, Aged About 29 Years Jarhabhata, Omnagar-2, H.No. 127/5 P.P.S.- Civil Line, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh)...............(Vehicle Owner), District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Appellants : Mr. Ajay Chandra, Adv. For Respondent No. 1 : Ms. Prerna Agrawal, Adv. on behalf of Mr. Sudhir Agrawal, Adv. For Respondent No. 3 : Mr. Gagendra Singh, Adv. on behalf of Mr. Raj Kamal Singh, Adv. Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment On Board 18/06/2025 1) The appellants/claimants have filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the award dated 27.01.2020, passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) in MACT No. 506/2017, whereby the Tribunal has awarded Rs. 9,77,200/- as compensation in favor of the claimants with interest @ 6% p.a. 2) Facts of the present case are that on 22.07.2017, Purushottam Kaushik (now deceased) was going from Village Chhatauna to Amsena on his motor-cycle and he dashed the stationary Hyva being driven by respondent No. 2 and owned by respondent No. 3 bearing registration CG–10–C–9630. As a result, he sustained injuries and was taken to CIMS Hospital, Bilaspur, where he was declared dead. 3) The claimants are the wife, children and parents of the deceased. They pleaded in the claim application that the age of the 3 deceased was 34 years at the time of the incident and he was working as a Plumber and was earning Rs. 15,000/- per-month. The claimants claimed a total sum of Rs. 1,09,60,000/- as compensation. 4) The Insurance Company filed its written statement and denied the averments made in the claim application. The Insurance Company denied the liability and submitted that respondents No. 2 and 3 (driver and owner) did not have valid documents at the time of the incident. Owner and driver of the offending vehicle were proceeded ex-parte. 5) Learned Tribunal framed issues and held that (i) the deceased died on account of the accident on 22.07.2017 and (ii) the offending vehicle was being driven in a breach of the insurance policy. The Tribunal awarded compensation to the tune of Rs. 9,77,200/- along with interest @ 6 % p.a. from the date of the application till its realization on the principle of “pay and recover”. 6) Learned counsel for the appellants-claimants submits that the learned Tribunal considered the monthly income of the deceased to be Rs. 4,500/- whereas the minimum wages prevailing in the State of Chhattisgarh in the year 2017 for a skilled- laborer was around Rs. 7,000/- therefore, the learned Tribunal committed an error of law in assessing the notional income of the deceased. He argues that the claim case was filed by five claimants but the learned tribunal has awarded Rs. 40,000/- under the head of 4 “loss of consortium” to the wife of the deceased only. Tribunal committed an error of law in not awarding compensation for the loss of consortium to the children and parents of the deceased (four individuals). He prays to modify the award by enhancing the compensation. 7) On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Insurance Company submits that the learned Tribunal has awarded just and proper compensation. She contends that the learned Tribunal has assessed the monthly income of the deceased according to the evidence led by the parties and there is no scope of interference. She prays that this appeal deserves to be dismissed. 8) Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No. 3 – driver supports the contention made by Ms. Agrawal. 9) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 10) A perusal of the findings recorded by the learned tribunal would reveal that the monthly income of the deceased was considered to be Rs. 4,500/- whereas the minimum wages payable to a skilled laborer in the year 2017 was around Rs. 7,000/- and thus in the opinion of this Court, the learned Tribunal calculated the monthly income of deceased on the lower side. Therefore, the notional income of the deceased is hereby enhanced from Rs. 4,500/- to Rs. 7,000/-. The impugned award would further reveal that the compensation for the loss of consortium has not been awarded to the children and parents of the deceased whereas 5 they were entitled to receive Rs. 40,000/- each. 11) However, the Tribunal has rightly applied the multiplier of 14 looking to the age of the deceased; added 40% of total dependency towards future prospects and deducted 1/4 rd towards personal expenses of the deceased. Therefore, under these heads, there is no scope for interference. 12) According to the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd vs Nanu Ram Alias Chuhru Ram 1 , the claimants would be entitled to get Rs. 40,000/- each under the head of loss of consortium. 13) Taking into consideration the above-discussed facts, the compensation payable to the claimants is hereby re-visited as under:- Sr. No. Particular Awarded by the Court 1. Monthly income of the deceased Rs. 7,000/- 2. Annual Income Rs. 84,000/- 3. Multiplier of 16 applied Rs. 13,44,000/- 4. Future Prospects @ 40% Rs. 5,37,600/- 5. Deduction towards personal expenses @ 1/4 Rs. 4,70,400/- 6. Total Loss of Income Rs. 14,11,200/- 7. Loss of Consortium Rs. 2,00,000/- (5 x 40,000) 8. Funeral Expenses Rs. 15,000/- 9. Loss of Estate Rs. 15,000/- 1. AIR OnLine SCC 1249 6 10. Total Rs. 16,41,200/- 11. Amount awarded by the Tribunal Rs. 9,77,200/- 12 Enhanced amount of compensation Rs. 6,64,000/- 14) For the foregoing reasons, the amount of compensation of Rs.9,77,200/- awarded by the tribunal is enhanced to Rs.16,41,200/-. Hence, the appellants/claimants are held entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 6,64,000 /- . The impugned award stands modified to the above extent. 15) The Insurance Company shall pay the compensation awarded to the appellants, preferably within a period of 90 days, as per the principle of “pay and recover”. Rest of the conditions of the award and interest shall remain intact. 16) Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed. Sd/- Rakesh Mohan Pandey JUDGE Ajinkya Digitally signed by AJINKYA PANSARE Date: 2025.06.24 14:10:12 +0530