1 MAC No. 448 of 2022 2025:CGHC:50889 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 448 of 2022 1.Jiteshwari Nishad Wd/o Late Romnath Nishad, Aged About 22 Years; 2.Minor Damini Nishad D/o Late Romnath Nishad, Aged About 6 Years Minor Through The Mother (Legal Guardian) Jiteshwari Nishad Wd/o Late Romnath Nishad, Appellant No. 1; 3.Agatram Nishad S/o Agar Singh Nishad, Aged About 47 Years; 4.Santosh Bai Nishad W/o Agatram Nishad, Aged About 45 Years; All Caste – Kenwat; All are R/o Village Rwan, Police Station City Kotwali, Balodabazar, District Balodabazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellants versus 1.Kuldeep Sahu S/o Sewak Ram Sahu, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Talab Para Lahod, Police Station Kasdol, District Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. (Dirver Of The Vehicle Tractor No. CG 06 GD 9716 & Trolley No. CG 06 GD 9717). 2.Pradip Kumar Sahu S/o Sewak Ram Sahu, Aged About 42 Years, R/o Borid, Post Office Pasid, Police Station Tumgaon, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. (Owner Of The Vehicle Tractor No. CG 06 GD 9716 & Trolley No. CG 06 GD 9717). ANKIT KUMAR SINGH Digitally signed by ANKIT KUMAR SINGH Date: 2025.10.15 10:43:45 +0530 2 MAC No. 448 of 2022 3.The New India Insurance Company Limited, Branch Office Upper Of Union Bank, Ambedkar Chowk, Balodabazar, District Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. (Insurer Of The Vehicle Tractor No. CG 06 GD 9716 & Trolley No. CG 06 GD 9717). ... Respondents For Appellants :- Mr. Anand Kesharwani, Advocate. For Respondent No. 3 :- Mr. Shivendu Pandya, Advocate. SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment On Board 13.10.2025 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 in the amount of compensation, challenging the impugned award dated 12.01.2022 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh (for short “Claims Tribunal”) in Claim Case No. 19/2021 whereby learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a sum of 18,84,400/- ₹ as compensation along with interest for death of Romnath Nishad. 3 MAC No. 448 of 2022 2.Mr. Anand Kesharwani, learned counsel for the appellants, would submit that learned Claims Tribunal has erred in awarding less amount of compensation in the facts of the case. He would also submit that the Claims Tribunal erred in assessing income of deceased as ₹8,000/- per month which should be 8,960/- as ₹ per Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the office of the Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh and also under the heads of loss of estate, funeral expenses and consortium less amount has been awarded by the Claims Tribunal which is liable to be enhanced, therefore, the instant appeal be allowed and the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal may suitably be enhanced. 3.Mr. Shivendu Pandya, learned counsel for the Insurance Company/respondent No.3, would submit that the appellant has failed to prove nature of occupation and income of deceased by producing clinching and admissible piece of evidence and also the age of the deceased, 4 MAC No. 448 of 2022 hence, the Tribunal is justified in assessing income of deceased persons on notional basis. The amount of compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is just and proper which does not call for any interference. 4.I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein- above and gone through the records meticulously. 5.Learned Claims Tribunal assessed the monthly income of deceased to be 8,000/-, however, in ₹ the opinion of this Court, as per the Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the office of Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh, the monthly income of the deceased should be ₹8,960/- (as per minimum wages prescribed at relevant time) and ₹1,07,520/- per annum. Moreover, under the heads of loss of estate, funeral expenses and consortium the amount is also liable to be enhanced, as such, the compensation amount is liable to be enhanced. 5 MAC No. 448 of 2022 6.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 Corporation & Ors2 and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors 3 , this Court is computing the compensation as below:- Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1. Income 8 ₹ ,000 x 12 = ₹ 96,000/- ₹ 8,960 x 12 = 1,07,520/- ₹ 2. Future prospect (+)40% = 38,400/- ₹ total income = 1,34,400/- ₹ (+) 40% = 43,008/- ₹ total income = ₹ 1,50,528/- 3. Deduction (-)¼ = 33,600/- ₹ ₹1,34,400–33,600= ₹1,00,800/- (total income) (-)¼ = 37,632/- ₹ ₹1,50,528–37,632= ₹1,12,896/- (total income) 4. Multiplier (x) 18 = 18,14,400/- ₹ (x) 18 = 20,32,128/- ₹ 5. Loss of Estate ₹15,000/- 16,500/- ₹ 6. Funeral Expenses ₹15,000/- 16,500/- ₹ 7. Consortium ₹40,000/- ₹1,76,000/- ( 44,000 x 4) ₹ Total ₹18,84,400/- ₹22,41,128 /- 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 6 MAC No. 448 of 2022 7.In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of 18,84,400/- ₹ awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to 22,41,128 ₹ /-. Hence, after deducting the amount of ₹18,84,400/- , the appellants are held to be entitled to an additional amount of ₹3,56,728/- . The concerned respondent is directed to deposit the amount of compensation as enhanced by this Court within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 9% 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. 8.Accordingly, this appeal is allowed in part and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Ankit