1 2025:CGHC:51359 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1141 of 2020 1. Smt. Juniya Bai Nishad W/o Manglu Nishad Aged About 45 Years ( Mother And Legal Heirs Of Deceased ) R/o Kailash Nagar, Thana- Mohan Nagar, Durg, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 2. Mangalu Nishad S/o Farit Nishad Aged About 49 Years ( Mother And Legal Heirs Of Deceased ) R/o Kailash Nagar, Thana- Mohan Nagar, Durg, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 3. Ishwari Nishad Mangalu Nishad Aged About 23 Years ( Sister And Legal Heirs Of Deceased ) R/o Kailash Nagar, Thana- Mohan Nagar, Durg, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant(s) versus 1. Kamlesh Das Manikpuri S/o Daulatdas Aged About 26 Years R/o Gauri Nagar, Achanak Nagar, Near Sulabh, Ward No. 12, Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh......... ( Driver Of The Truck No. Cg08- Y3370 ), District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh 2. Vivek Kumar Singh S/o R.S. Singh Aged About 27 Years R/o Maanpur, District- Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ....... ( Owner Of The Truck No. Cg08-Y3370), District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh 3. The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Branch Office- Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh, Through Branch Office- Near Rajendra Park Chowk, G.E. Raod, Durg, Chhattisgarh........ ( Insurer Of The Truck No. Cg 08-Y3370 ), District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) Digitally signed by AJINKYA PANSARE Date: 2025.10.15 16:02:10 +0530 2 For Appellants : Mr. Syed Majid Ali, Advocate For Respondents 1&2 : None, though served For Respondents No.3 : Mr. H.S. Patel, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment On Board 15-10-2025 1) This appeal has been preferred by the appellants/ claimants under Section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 assailing the award passed by learned Second Additional Claims Tribunal, Durg in Claim Case No. 26/2017 dated 17.3.2020 whereby Claims Tribunal has passed an award to the tune of Rs. 9,77,200/- with interest @ 7% on account of death of Khemlal Nishad. 2) Facts of the present case are that on 14.11.2016, deceased Khemlal Nishad was standing near road and the offending vehicle bearing registration No. CG-08-Y-3370, which was being driven by respondent No. 1 in rash and negligent manner, dashed Khemlal Nishad. In the accident, Khemlal Nishad sustained grievous injuries and died. Claimants, who are parents and sister of the deceased moved a claim application pleading that deceased was aged about 22 years and used to earn Rs. 12,000/- per month working as Mason. Claims Tribunal framed issues ; parties led evidence and Claims Tribunal passed the award. 3) Learned counsel for the appellants submits that Claims Tribunal has assessed the notional income of the deceased to be Rs. 6,000/- per month which is not in consonance with the minimum 3 wage matrix applicable in the State of Chhattisgarh at the relevant time. He further submits that under conventional heads, Claims Tribunal has awarded meager amounts. He contends that Claims Tribunal has awarded Rs. 40,000/- towards loss of consortium whereas claimants are three i.e. parents and sister of the deceased. He prays to modify the award accordingly. 4) On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company submits that Claims Tribunal has rightly assessed the monthly income of the deceased and awarded appropriate compensation under the conventional heads and there is no scope to interfere with the award. He contends that this appeal deserved to be dismissed. 5) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 6) Admittedly, age of the deceased was 22 years and he used to work as mason. Claims Tribunal has assessed the monthly income of the deceased to be Rs. 6,000/- whereas according to the minimum wage matrix applicable in the State of Chhattisgarh, minimum wages payable to a semi-skilled labour was Rs. 6,300/- per month and Claims Tribunal ought to have considered that figure. For loss of consortium, Claims Tribunal has awarded Rs. 40,000/- whereas parents and sister of the deceased filed the claim case and Claims Tribunal ought to have awarded loss of consortium in favor of parents of the deceased. The accident occurred on 14.11.2016, therefore in the opinion of this Court, 4 parents of the deceased are entitled to receive an additional compensation for loss of consortium alongwith an additional sum of 20% i.e. Rs. 48,000/- according to the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of National Insurance Company Ltd. V. Pranay Sethi1. 7) However, under other conventional heads Claims Tribunal has awarded Rs. 15,000/- each towards loss of estate and funeral expenses and same does not warrant any interference. 8) Thus, in light of the aforesaid discussion and in light of the judgments of the Supreme Court rendered in the matters of Pranay Sethi (supra), 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 Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1. Annual Income Rs. 6,000 x 12 = Rs. 72,000/- Rs.6,300 x 12 = Rs. 75,600/- 2. Annual Income adding Future Prospect Rs.72,000+Rs.28,800 =Rs.1,00,800 Rs.75,600+Rs.30,240 = Rs.1,05,840 /- (@40%) 3. Annual income after Deduction towards personal expenses Rs.1,00,800-Rs.50,400= Rs.50,400/- (@1/2) Rs.1,05,840- Rs.52,920= Rs.52,920/- (@1/2) 4. Annual Income after applying Multiplier Rs. 9,07,200/- (@18) Rs. 9,52,560/- (@18) 1. (2017) 16 SCC 680 2. (2009) 6 SCC 121 3. (2008) 18 SCC 130 5 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. 88,000/- (two claimants-parents) TOTAL Rs. 9,77,200/- Rs.10,70,560/- 9) Accordingly, the amount of compensation of Rs.9,77,200/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.10,70,560 /-. Hence, the appellants are entitled for an additional amount of Rs.93,360/-. The Insurance Company is 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. 10) 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 A j i n k y a