1 2025:CGHC:10130 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1329 of 2015 1. Smt Ramkali W/o Late Ramkripal, Aged About 48 Years Caste Panika, R/o Village Badekaluaa, Thana And Tahsil Khadagawa, District Koriya Chhattisgarh (Claimant). 2. Jaishanker S/o Ramkripal, Aged About 33 Years Caste Panika, R/o Village Badekaluaa, Thana And Tahsil Khadagawa, District Koriya Chhattisgarh (Claimant). 3. Gulabram S/o Ramkripal, Aged About 30 Years Caste Panika, R/o Village Badekaluaa, Thana And Tahsil Khadagawa, District Koriya Chhattisgarh (Claimant). 4. Uday Prasad S/o Ramkripal, Aged About 23 Years Caste Panika, R/o Village Badekaluaa, Thana And Tahsil Khadagawa, District Koriya Chhattisgarh (Claimant). 5. Ilawati D/o Ramkripal, Aged About 35 Years Caste Panika, R/o Village Badekaluaa, Thana And Tahsil Khadagawa, District Koriya Chhattisgarh (Claimant). ... Appellants/Claimants versus 1. Vijay Kumar S/o Dharampal, R/o Village Pipariya Bazar, Thana Pasan, At Present Oodagi, Damarpara, Ward No. 2, Baikunthpur, District Koriya Chhattisgarh. 2. Rampyare (Died And Deleted) As Per Hon'ble Court Order Dated 29-01-2025. 3. The Oriental Insurance Company Limited Through Its Branch Manager, Branch Office Ambikapur, District Sarguja Chhattisgarh (Insurer). ...Respondents 2 For Appellants/Claimants : Ms. Bhavika Kotecha, Adv. On behalf of Mr. Parag Kotecha, Advocate. For Respondent No. 3 : Mr. Rakesh Ku. Manikpuri, Adv. On behalf of Mr. Sandeep Shrivastava, Advocate. For other Respondents : None. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal, J. Order on Board (28.02.2025) 1. This appeal arises out of the award dated 31.08.2015 passed by 01st Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Manendragarh, District-Koriya (C.G.) in M.A. Claim Case No. 10/2014 awarding a compensation of Rs. 3,04,000/- with Simple interest @ 7% per annum from the date of application, in favour of the appellants/claimants for their irreparable loss. 2. The averment in the claim petition, in brief, is that on 04.06.2012, when Ramkripal (now deceased) was going on his cycle from Bade Kalua to Khadgawan for duty and when he reached nearby Gram Chhapar Podi, respondent No. 1 was driving the Bolero bearing registration No. CG16B1294 in a rash and negligently manner and cause accident with the deceased cycle, due to which Ramkripal (deceased) suffered grievous injuries and died while undergoing treatment at Khadgawan Government Hospital. After that, a report was lodged based on the above stated offence. It is stated that on the date of the incident, the age of the deceased was 55 years who was working as a security guard, selling milk and also involved in an agricultural 3 work and was earning Rs. 7000/- per month from his work. Due to the casual death of the husband, father of the appellants/claimants, there is an irreparable loss to the appellants. Therefore, the appellants preferred an application to claim a total compensation of Rs. 19,32,000/- for their irreparable loss. 3. When the claim application under Section 166 of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 for compensation was filed by wife and children of the deceased before the claims tribunal against the driver, owner and insurance company of the alleged vehicle, the tribunal in absence of appropriate proof of income of the deceased was taken Rs. 3000/- per month and 36,000/- per annum, as per wages of the unskilled worker at that relevant time. The aged of deceased considered about 55 years according to merg intimation and postmortem report and the claimants are the wife and children of the deceased so deduction towards personal and caring expenses would be 1/3 which is 36,000-12000/-= 24000/- and considering the age of the deceased i.e., 55 years according to postmortem report so after applying multiplier of 11, the total loss of dependency works out to Rs. 2,64,000/- and Rs.40,000/- has been awarding on other heads, thus, total compensation of Rs. 3,04,000/- (2,64,000+ 40,000 = 3,04,000/-) with simple interest @ 7% per annum, in favour of the appellants/claimants. Hence, this appeal for enhancement. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side and needs to be enhanced suitably. He further submits that the claimants have pleaded the income of the deceased as Rs. 7000/- per month i.e., Rs. 84000/-per annum, but the learned Claims Tribunal has only assessed notional 4 income as Rs. 3000/- per month i.e., Rs. 36000/- per annum and total compensation of Rs. 3,04,000/- has been awarded including the amount of other conventional heads of Rs. 40,000/-. Learned counsel for appellants also submits that the learned trial Court has not computed future prospect which should be computed 10%. He further submits that the Tribunal has awarded lesser compensation under other heads which also needs to be enhanced suitably. Therefore, this appeal may be allowed. 5. On the other hand, it has argued on behalf of the counsel for respondent No. 3 that in the facts and circumstances of case, the compensation awarded by the Learned Claims Tribunal is just and proper and requires no further enhancement. 6. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 7. In a motor accident claim case, what is important is that, the compensation to be awarded by the Courts/Tribunals should be just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the case. It should neither be a meager amount of compensation, nor a Bonanza. 8. Now this Court shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.3,04,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the given facts and circumstances of the case. 9. As regards income of the deceased, though the claimants have pleaded that the deceased was earning Rs.7000/- per month from the work of security guard, selling milk and agricultural work but no appropriate documentary evidence in support thereof has been adduced, but it cannot be said 5 that the deceased was not earning anything from his work. Therefore, evidence regarding income of the deceased, keeping in mind the nature of occupation, date of accident, wage structure prevailing on the date of accident, price index and cost of living etc., I find it appropriate to take income of deceased as Rs. 4,498/- per month. The annual income of the deceased comes to Rs. 53,976/- per annum. As per National Insurance Company Ltd., Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others, (2017) 16 SCC 680 after adding 10% towards future prospects i.e. Rs. 5,397/-, the annual income of the deceased comes to Rs. 59,373/-. 10.The deceased was aged about 55 years and was married and the claimants are the wife and children (major) of the deceased so deduction towards personal and caring expenses would be 1/3 i.e., 19791/-, as has rightly held by the Tribunal as per para 25 of the impugned judgment, the annual dependency comes to Rs. 39,582/-. In view of judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma (Smt.) and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121 and National Insurance Company Ltd., Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others, (2017) 16 SCC 680 considering the age of the deceased, after applying multiplier of 11, as has rightly held by the Claims Tribunal, the total loss of dependency works out to Rs. 4,35,402/-. The claimants are further entitled for loss of estate Rs. 15,000/-, for funeral expenses Rs. 15,000/- and as per 'Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nanu, reported in AIR Online 2018 SC 189, the claimants are further entitled for loss of love and affection Rs. 40,000/- each i.e. Rs. 2,00,000/-. Therefore, the claimants would become entitled for total compensation of Rs. 6,65,402/-. Thus, the claimants are entitled for compensation in the following manner:- 6 S.No. Heads Calculation 01 Compensation towards dependency Rs. 4,35,402/- 02 Towards loss of estate Rs. 15,000/- 03 Towards Love and affection to all the two claimants @ Rs. 40,000/- Rs. 2,00,000/- 04 Funeral Expenses Rs. 15,000/- Total compensation Awarded Rs. 6,65,402/- 11. Thus, the total compensation is recomputed as Rs. 6,65,402/-. After deducting Rs. 3,04,000/- as awarded by the tribunal, the enhancement would be Rs. 3,61,402/-. 12. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. The claimants shall be entitled to Rs. 3,61,402/- in addition to what is already awarded by the claims Tribunal. The enhanced amount will carry simple interest @ 6% from the date of enhancement of the award till its realization. It is made clear that the remaining amount of award shall be paid by the insurance company. 13. The Registry is further directed to communicate the claimants in writing “the enhanced amount” in this appeal as against the award made by the Tribunal below. The said communication be made in Hindi Deonagri language and the help of paralegal workers may be availed with a co- ordination of Secretary, Legal Aid of the concerned area wherein the claimants resides. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Sourabh P.