1 2025:CGHC:54119 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 555 of 2024 1. Smt Sita W/o Late Shri Singh Aged About 24 Years R/o Vill. Siriyakhoh, P.S. Podhi, District : Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur, Chhattisgarh 2. Varsha Singh Ayam D/o Late Shri Singh Aged About 5 Years Minors Through Guardian Mother Smt. Sita Singh, R/o Vill. Siriyakhoh, P.S. Podhi, District : Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant(s) versus 1. Ajay S/o Omprakash Aged About 24 Years R/o Kothari, P.S. Manendragarh, Distt. Mcb (Manendragarh- Chirmiri-Baikunthpur) Chhattisgarh. (Owner Of Tractor No. Cg-16 Cq-4457) 2. Vikas Kumar Kewat S/o Narayan Prasad Kewat Aged About 24 Years R/o Vill. Navadih, Sarbhoka, P.S. Podi, Distt. Mcb (Manendragarh-Chirmiri- Baikunthpur, Chhattisgarh (Driver Of Tractor No. Cg-16 Cq-4457) 3. Magma H.D.I. General Insurance Company Limited Through Branch Manager, Magma H.D.I. General Insurance Company Limited, Office No. 501, 509-5012, 5th Floor, D.V.C.T. Corporate Park, Plot No. 1, Block No. 9, Rajbandhu Maidan, Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh (Insurer Of Tractor No. Cg-16 Cq-4457) ... Respondent(s) For Appellants/Claimants : Mr. Ramsajiwan, Advocate For Respondent No. 3 : Ms. Harneet Kaur, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 06.11 .2025 1. The appellants have filed this appeal for enhancement of compensation against award passed by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Manendragarh in Claim Case No. 20/2023 dated 14.02.2024, whereby the learned Tribunal has passed an award to the tune of Rs. 11,40,000/- with interest at the rate of 9% per anum on account of death of Shri Singh. SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Digitally signed by SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Date: 2025.11.07 14:37:26 +0530 2 2. The facts of the present case are that on 17.01.2023, the deceased Shri Singh along with his brother Shyamlal were going for work from Village Siriyakhoh on the motorcycle, and at the same time, the driver of the offending Swaraj Tractor bearing registration No. C.G.-16-CQ-4457 coming from opposite side by driving it rashly and negligently, dashed the motorcycle, consequently, Shri Singh sustained injuries and died. 3. The appellant No. 1 is widow, appellant No. 2 is daughter of the deceased Shri Singh. They filed a claim case under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 claiming therein compensation to the tune of Rs. 91,25,000/- inter alia on the ground that at the time of the death, the age of the deceased was 30 years. It is pleaded that the deceased was earning Rs. 15,000/- as he was a Mason. 4. The driver and owner of the offending vehicle filed their reply. They stated that the deceased himself was negligent. It is pleaded that at the time of accident, the driver did have valid driving license and the accident occurred due to a head on collision between two vehicles. The Insurance Company filed its reply and denied the contents of the application. 5. Learned tribunal framed issues and held that at the time of accident, the age of the deceased was 30 years. The learned Tribunal assessed the contributory negligence of the deceased at 30%, whereas the offending tractor was held responsible for 70% of the negligence. The learned tribunal awarded compensation to the tune of Rs. 11,40,000/- along with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of application till its realization. 6. Mr. Ramsajiwan, Advocate counsel appearing for the appellants/claimants would submit that the accident occurred due to the head on collision between the offending Tractor and motorcycle driven by the deceased, namely, Shri Singh. He would further submit that the deceased was a Mason, and at the time of accident, his age was 30 years and the learned 3 Tribunal has considered the monthly income Rs. 12,000/-. He would further submit that the learned Tribunal applied multiplier of 16 instead of 17. He would also submit that the learned Tribunal has not awarded compensation for future prospect. He would further submit that the learned Tribunal has awarded a fix sum of Rs. 77,000/- for loss of consortium, loss of estate and funeral estate. He would pray to enhance the compensation. 7. On the other hand, Ms. Harneet Kaur, Advocate appearing for the Insurance Company would oppose. She would submit that the learned Tribunal has awarded just and proper compensation and the appeal deserves to be dismissed. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 9. There was head on collision between the offending Tractor and motorcycle, and therefore, the learned Tribunal held the deceased liable for contributory negligence to the extent of 30%. The learned Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased Rs. 12,000/-, which appears to be appropriate and that part does not require interference by this Court. The learned Tribunal has held that at the time of accident, age of the deceased was 30 years, but applied multiplier of 16, which should be 17 according to the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Sarla Verma & Ors Vs Delhi Transport Corp. & Anr, (2009) 6 SCC 121. The learned Tribunal has not awarded compensation for future prospect. Further, the learned Tribunal has not awarded separate compensation for loss of consortium, loss of estate and funeral expenses. 10. 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 4 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, this Court is recomputing the compensation as below:- Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded by Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1. Income Rs. 12,000 x12 = Rs. 1,44,000/- Rs. 12,000 x12 = Rs. 1,44,000/- 2. Future Prospect NIL (40%) = Rs. 36,000/- 3. Deduction (-) 1/3 Rs. 48,000/- Rs. 96,000/- (-) 1/3 Rs. 60,000/- Rs. 1,20,000/- 4. Multiplier (x) 16 = Rs. 15,36,000/- (x) 17 = Rs. 20,40,000/- 5. Medical Expenses Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 15,000/- 6. Loss of Estate Rs. 77,000/- Rs. 15,000/- 7. Funeral expenses Rs. 15,000/- 8. Loss of Consortium (for appellant No. 1) Rs. 40,000/- 9. Loss of Consortium(for appellant No. 2) Rs. 40,000/- 10. TOTAL Rs. 16,28,000/- Rs. 21,65,000/- 30% deduction (Rs. 4,88,400/-) 30% deduction (Rs. 6,49,500/-) Grand Total Rs. 11,39,600/- (≈) Rs. 11,40,000/- Rs. 15,15,500/- 11. For the forgoing reasons, the appeal is allowed in part. The amount of compensation of Rs. 11,40,000/- awarded by the tribunal is enhanced 5 to Rs. 15,15,500/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs. 11,40,000/-, the appellants/claimants are held entitled for an additional amount of Rs. 3,75,000/- which shall carry interest @ 9% per annum. 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. 12. Accordingly, the instant appeal is hereby partly allowed. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge $iddhant6