1 2025:CGHC:7870 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR REVP No. 16 of 2025 1 - The Branch Manager The New India Insurance Company Limited, Branch - Korba, District - Korba (C.G.) (Insurer Respondent No.3) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Gayatri Bai W/o Late Jayantrika Netam @ Jantika Netam @ Jantika Kumar Aged About 45 Years 2 - Meena D/o Late Jayantrika Netam @ Jantika Netam @ Jantika Kumar Aged About 25 Years Gond 3 - Anita D/o Late Jayantrika Netam @ Jantika Netam @ Jantika Kumar Aged About 16 Years Minor Through Their Natural Guardian Mother Gayatri Bai 4 - Jitendra S/o Late Jayantrika Netam @ Jantika Netam @ Jantika Kumar Aged About 14 Years Minor Through Their Natural Guardian Gayatri Bai 5 - Shiv Shankar S/o Late Jayantrika Netam @ Jantika Netam @ Jantika Kumar Aged About 12 Years Minor Through Their Natural Guadian Gayatri Bai 6 - Leelu Singh S/o Shri Rampyari Aged About 60 Years 7 - Firtin Bai W/o Shri Leelu Singh Aged About 55 Years Respondents No. 1 to 7 are R/o Nariyara Police Station Mulmula Tahsil Akatara District Janjgir - Champa (C.G.) (1to Appellants) 8 - Ashok Kumar Patel S/o Shri Shivkumar Patel Aged About 34 Years R/o Risdi (Tripathi Mohalla Police Station Balco District Korba (C.G.) 2 9 - M.S Abhinav Construction Ghugus Site Camp Office (W.C.L.) Ghugus District Chandrapur (Maharashtra ... Respondent(s) For Appellant : Shri Shivendu Pandya, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Shri Pushpedra Kumar Patel, Advocate (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 13/02/2025 The review petitioner (for short “the petitioner”) seeks review of the order dated 5.11.2024 passed in MAC No 150 of 2019 on the ground that due to inadvertence in the said order, at para No. 8 & 9, the order of compensation to the claimants was considered and the deduction towards personal expenses has been computed as 1/5th but due to inadvertence, it has been mentioned as 1/6th . 2. Facts of the case in brief are that appellants/claimants being wife, father and parents of the deceased had filed claim application claiming total compensation of Rs. 8,84,000/-. Learned Tribunal on the basis of pleadings of the parties, framed issues and after appreciation of evidence and material available on record awarded the compensation. Being dissatisfied by this award, the appellants/claimants have come before this Court stating that the Tribunal has erred in awarding the amount under conventional heads on lower side and was also unjustified in assessing the income of the deceased. 3. This Court vide order dated 5.11.2024 in MAC No. 150 of 2019 after hearing counsel for the parties, has assessed the income of the deceased as Rs. 3060/- per month which was justified and the Tribunal has rightly assessed the future prospects as 30% and the multiplier of 3 14 which was applied is also justified looking to the age of the deceased to be 45 years. As the deceased was married and left behind his wife, four children and parents, therefore the deduction towards personal income had been considered as 1/6th instead of 1/5th. However, this Court has enhanced the compensation under the conventional heads. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent has no objection to the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant. 5. It is indisputable that the order dated 5.11.2024, which is sought to be reviewed herein, has been passed by this Court in MAC No. 150 of 2019 on the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner to the extent that “the deduction towards personal expenses would be 1/5th instead of 1/6th”. 6. Thus, this Court recomputed the compensation as under: Sl.No. Compensation Awarded Conventional heads 1. Monthly income of the deceased Rs. 3060/- 2. Future prospects @ 30% Rs. 918/- 3. Total Income Rs. 3978- 4. Personal expenses (1/5th) Rs. 795/- 5. Annual Income Rs. 3183x12=Rs.38196/- 6. Multiplier of 14 applied to assessed total loss of dependency Rs. 38196 x14= Rs. 5,34,744/- 7. Funeral expenses Rs. 15,000/- 8. Loss of Estate Rs. 15,000/- 9. Loss of spousal consortium to appellant No.1 Rs. 40,000/- 10. Loss of parental consortium to appellants No.2 to 5 Rs. 1,60,000/- (Rs. 40,000/- each) 11. Loss of Filial Consortium to appellant No.6 & 7 Rs. 80,000/- (Rs. 40,000/- each) Total Rs. 8,44,744/- 4 7. Thus, the order is modified to the extent that in para 8 it is mentioned as 1/6th deduction towards personal expenses which may be read as 1/5th. The amount of compensation of Rs. 6,04,646/- is enhanced to Rs. 8,44,744/-. Hence after deducting the amount of Rs. 6,04,646/-, the claimants are held entitled for an additional amount of Rs. 2,40,098/-. the additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of claim application before the Tribunal till its realization. Rest of the conditions of impugned award shall remain intact. The insurance company shall pay the compensation awarded to the appellant/claimants first and thereafter as per the doctrine of pay and recover, shall recover the same from respondents No. 1 & 2-driver and owner. 8. The petition is accordingly, disposed of. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge SUGUNA DUBEY Digitally signed by SUGUNA DUBEY Date: 2025.03.07 10:55:17 +0530