1 2025:CGHC:47859 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1256 of 2018 1 - Smt. Chandrika Bai W/o Late Bisesar Nishad, Aged About 45 Years R/o Village And Post Arjuni Tahsil Dongargaon, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh., District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Satish Kumar S/o Late Bisesar Nishad, Aged About 17 Years Minor Through His Natural Guardian Mother, Smt. Chandriak Bai, W/o Late Bisesar Nishad, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Village And Post Arjuni Tahsil Dongargaon, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh. (Claimants), District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant(s) versus 1 - Dr. Krishnarao S/o Jagannaikalu, Aged About 40 Years R/o Behind Sangam Bar, Gayatri Mandir Street Zone - 2, Bhilai, Police Station Chhawni, Tahsil And District Durg, Chhattisgarh. (Owner), District : Durg, Chhattisgarh RAGHVENDRA JAT Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 2 - Divisional Manager, Divisional Office, National Insurance Company Limited, Dakshin Gangotri Supela Bhilai, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh. (Insurance Company)., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Appellant(s) : Mr. Praveen K. Dhurandhar, Advocate. For Respondent(s) No. 1 : Mr. Amit Tamrakar, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Avinash Chand Sahu, Advocate. For Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Shashank Agrawal, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Sudhir Agrawal, Advocate. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 17/09/2025 1. This appeal has been filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, against the award dated 7.3.2018 passed by the learned First Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal to First Additional Tribunal, Durg (C.G.), in Claim Case No. 309/15 whereby an amount of Rs. 7,15,000/- with interest @ 9% per annum has been awarded in the favour of the claimants of the deceased for their irreparable loss. 2. Brief facts of the case, is that the claimants, being dependents of the deceased Hemant Nishad, filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act seeking compensation from the respondents. On 17/09/2014 at about 9:10 PM, the deceased 3 was traveling on a motorcycle owned by respondent No. 1 and driven by Parmanand Nishad (also deceased). The motorcycle was driven rashly and negligently by Parmanand, who lost control and crashed into a tree, resulting in the death of both individuals. A crime was subsequently registered in connection with the incident. It was further stated that the deceased was a 22-year-old driver earning Rs. 12,500/- per month, and the claimants demanded total compensation of Rs. 41,50,000/-. Respondent No. 1, the owner of the vehicle, denied the allegations and stated that the motorcycle was insured with respondent No. 2. Respondent No. 2 also denied the claims and pleaded a breach of the insurance policy. After considering the evidence, the learned claims tribunal passed an award dated 07- 03-2018, granting a lesser amount of compensation and wrongfully exonerating the insurance company. 3. The tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs. 4,500/- per month i.e. Rs. 54,000/- per annum. After deduction of 1/2 of the income i.e. Rs. 27,000/- for personal expenses, the amount would be Rs. 27,000/-. After adding 40% towards future prospects i.e. Rs. 10,800/-, the annual income comes to Rs. 37,800/-. Considering the age of the deceased to be 23 years and the appellants/claimants are the wife and brother of the deceased, the Tribunal applied the multiplier of 18 and calculated 4 the total loss of dependency as Rs. 6,80,400/-. Further Rs. 15,000/- towards funeral expenses, Rs. 15,000/- towards loss of estate and Rs. 5,000/- towards medical expenses has been awarded. Accordingly, the Claims Tribunal has awarded total compensation of Rs. 7,15,400/- in favour of the wife and brother of the deceased with interest @ 9% per annum, from the date of application till its realization. Hence, this appeal for enhancement. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants submits that the claims Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 7,15,400/- which is not in accordance with law and the same is required to be enhanced in accordance with law. He further submits that the compensation awarded under other heads is also on lower side and needs to be enhanced. Hence, this appeal may be allowed by enhancing the compensation amount suitably. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent No. 1 opposes the same. 6. Learned counsel for respondent No. 2 submits that in the facts and circumstances of case, the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is just and proper and requires no further enhancement. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5 8. 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. 9. Now this Court shall examine as to whether the compensation of awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the given facts and circumstances of the case. 10. As regards the income of the deceased, though the claimants have pleaded that the deceased was earning Rs. 12,500/- per month from his work, but no documentary evidence in this regard has been produced by the claimants. The learned claims Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased as Rs. 4,500/- per month. Therefore, in absence of any reliable evidence regarding income of the deceased, keeping in mind the nature of occupation, date of accident, price index and cost of living etc. especially notification by Labour Department for minimum wages. Upon considering the aforementioned factors, I find it appropriate to take income of deceased as Rs. 5468/- per month as per minimum wages, the annual income comes to Rs. 65,616/- per annum. As per National Insurance Company Ltd., Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others, (2017) 16 SCC 680 after adding 40% towards future prospects i.e. Rs. 26,246/-, the annual income comes to 6 Rs. 91,862/-. 11. Considering the fact that the deceased was aged about 23 years and the appellant/claimants are the wife and brother of the deceased so deduction towards personal expenses would be 1/2 (Rs. 45,931/-) of the income and after deduction of the same the annual dependency comes to Rs. 45,931/-. 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 and also considering the age of the deceased, after applying multiplier of 18, the total loss of dependency works out to Rs. 8,26,758/-. The claimants are further entitled for Rs. 5,000/- towards medical expenses, Rs. 18,000/- towards loss of estate (increase of 10% in every three years) and Rs. 18,000/- for funeral expenses (increase of 10% in every three years). As per 'Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nanu, reported in AIR Online 2018 SC 189, the claimants are further entitled for Rs. (40,000/-X2+10% +10%) each (with increase of 10% in every three years) i.e. Rs. 96,000/- for consortium. Accordingly, the appellants/claimants i.e. wife and brother of the deceased would become entitled for total compensation of Rs. 9,63,758/- in the following manner:- S.No. Heads Calculation 7 01 Towards loss of dependency Rs. 8,26,758/- 02 Towards consortium along with with increase of 10% in every three years (40,000X2+10% +10%). Rs. 96,000/- 03 Towards loss of estate along with increase of 10% in every three years. Rs. 18,000/- 04 Towards Funeral Expenses along with increase of 10% in every three years. Rs. 18,000/- 05 Towards Medical Expenses. Rs. 5,000/- Total Rs. 9,63,758/- 12. Thus, the total compensation is recomputed as Rs. 9,63,758/-. After deducting Rs. 7,15,000/- as awarded by the tribunal, the enhancement would be Rs. 2,48,758/-. 13. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. The claimants/appellants i.e. wife and brother of the deceased shall be entitled for the enhanced amount of Rs. 2,48,758/- in addition to what is already awarded by the claims Tribunal. The enhanced amount will carry interest @ 6% from the date of enhancement of the award till its realization. The impugned award stands modified to the above extent and rest of the conditions shall remain intact. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat