1 2025:CGHC:49566 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1878 of 2024 1 - Laxmin Bai Chouhan W/o Late Ramkishan Aged About 43 Years (Mother), Resident Of Village Ranpota, P.S. Hasaud, District Sakti, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Kartik Chouhan S/o Late Ramkishan Aged About 18 Years (Brother) , Resident Of Village Ranpota, P.S. Hasaud, District Sakti, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Dinesh Chouhan S/o Late Ramkishan Aged About 15 Years (Brother) Minor, Through Legal Natural Guardian Mother Laxmin Bai, Resident Of Village Ranpota, P.S. Hasaud, District Sakti, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Sadhna D/o Late Ramkishan Aged About 12 Years (Sister) Minor, Through Legal Natural Guardian Mother Laxmin Bai, Resident Of Village Ranpota, P.S. Hasaud, District Sakti, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellants versus 1 - Satyanarayan Gond S/o Sahasram Gond Aged About 34 Years R/o Village Bailachua, P.S. And Tahsil Sakti, District Sakti, Chhattisgarh. ............... (Driver Of The Offending Vehicle Pickup Bearing Registration No. C.G. 11 A. X. 2131) 2 - Puranchand Dubey S/o Devdhar Prasad Dubey Resident Of Village Hardi, Adbhar, P.S. Malkharouda Chowki Adbhar, District Sakti, Chhattisgarh. ............... (Owner Of The Offending Vehicle Pickup Bearing Registration No. C.G. 11 A. X. 2131) 3 - Magma H.D.I. General Insurance Company Ltd. 1st Floor Block A -1, Pujari Chamber Pachpedi Naka Chowk, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ............... (Insurer Of The Offending Vehicle Pickup Bearing Registration No. C.G. 11 A. X. 2131). ... Respondent(s) Digitally signed by NADIM MOHLE 2 For Appellants : Ms. Nita Choubey, Advocate For Respondents No.1 & 2 For Respondent No.3 : : None though served. Ms. Aditi Diwan, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment on Board 06/10/2025 1. This appeal has been preferred by the claimants seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the learned IInd Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sakti, in Claim Case No.53/2023, whereby compensation to the tune of Rs. 11,28,400/- with interest @ 6% per annum was awarded in favour of the claimant(s) on account of the death of Shani Chauhan in a motor accident. 2. Ms. Nita Choubey, learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellant No.1 is the mother of the deceased, while appellants No.2 to 4 are his siblings, who were dependent on his income. It is contended that the deceased was working as a Painter, but the learned Tribunal assessed his monthly income on the lower side at only Rs. 7,000/- per month, ignoring the prevalent minimum wages. It is further contended that the learned Tribunal also failed to award compensation under the head of loss of consortium to appellants No.2 to 4, thus, prays for enhancement of compensation under all relevant heads. 3. On the other hand, Ms. Aditi Diwan, learned counsel appearing respondent No.3 submits that the claimants failed to adduce any 3 documentary or oral evidence to establish that appellants No.2 to 4 were dependent upon the income of the deceased. It is further argued that the learned Tribunal has already awarded just and proper compensation, leaving no scope for enhancement; thus, the appeal deserves to be dismissed. 4. Heard. 5. Admittedly, the deceased Shani Chauhan, aged about 23 years, on 17.06.2023 was dashed by the offending vehicle bearing registration No. CG-11-AX-2131, and he succumbed to the injuries. The deceased was an unmarried person, and therefore, the learned Tribunal rightly deducted 50% towards personal expenses. 6. On other heads, the learned Tribunal has awarded just & proper compensation except loss of consortium to the claimants No.2 to 4. The Insurance Company failed to lead evidence to prove the fact that the appellants No.2 to 4 were not dependent on the income of the deceased. It is not in dispute that the age of appellant No.2 was 18 years, and appellants No.3 and 4 were minors at the time of accident, therefore, it can safely be presumed that they were dependent upon the deceased. 7. The learned Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs. 7,000/- per month, which appears to be on the lower side. The deceased was working as a Painter, and as per the Minimum Wages Notification applicable on the date of accident, the monthly wages of 4 an unskilled labourer was Rs. 9,900/-, hence, the income ought to have been assessed accordingly. The learned tribunal has also committed error while not awarding compensation for loss of consortium to respondents No. 2 to 4, therefore, the compensation is hereby revisited hereunder:- Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded by Tribunal Compensation awarded by this COurt 1. Income Rs. 7,000 x12 = Rs. 84,000/- Rs. 9,900 x 12 = Rs. 1,18,800/- 2. Future Prospect 40% (84,000 + 33,600) = 1,17,600/- Rs.1,18,800 + 47,520 = Rs. 1,66,320/- 3. Deduction (-) 1/2 Rs.58,000/- Rs. 83,160/- 4. Multiplier (x) 18 = Rs.10,58,400/- (x) 18 = Rs. 14,96,880/- 5. Loss of Estate Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 15,000/- 6. Funeral expenses Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 15,000/- 7. Loss of Consortium Rs. 40,000/- Rs.40,000 x 4 = Rs. 1,60,000/- 8. TOTAL Rs.11,28,400/- Rs. 18,46,880/- Thus, the total compensation is enhanced from Rs. 11,28,400/- to Rs. 18,46,880/-. After deducting the amount of Rs. 11,28,400/- already awarded by the learned Tribunal, the enhanced amount of Rs. 7,18,480/- shall now be payable to the appellants by the respondents. 5 8. The respondents are directed to make payment of additional compensation assessed herein-above within period of 60 days, failing which, the said amount shall carry an interest @ 18% p.a. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. Sd/- Rakesh Mohan Pandey JUDGE Nadim