1 2025:CGHC:51089 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 292 of 2024 1 - Ramkumar S/o Shri Patar Sai Aged About 30 Years R/o Village - Ghuipani, Post - Kawai, Tahsil - Bagicha, District Jaspur (C.G.), 2 - Mrs. Muni Nag W/o Shri Ramkumar Aged About 31 Years R/o Village - Ghuipani, Post - Kawai, Tahsil - Bagicha, District Jaspur (C.G.) ... Appellants versus 1 - Pappu Kumar Gupta S/o Mahavir Prasad Gupta Aged About 35 Years R/o Village - Sauns, Thana Chanho, District Ranchi (Jharkhand), Present Address - C/o Santosh Gupta Father Bhola Sao, Bus-Stand Jashpur (C.G.),...(Owner) 2 - Manish Kumar S/o Ramkumar Aged About 45 Years R/o Village - Timarla, Tahsil - Jashpur, District Jashpur (C.G.),...(Driver) 3 - The New India Insurance Company Limited Local Micro Branch Office, Judev Complex Gamharia Road Jashpur (C.G.),...(Insurer) ... Respondent(s) For Appellants : Mr. Divyanand Patel, Advocate For Respondents No.1 & 2 : Ms. Neelam Khan, Advocate, holding the brief of Mr. Sanjay Agrawal, Advocate 2 For Respondent No.3 :Mr. Qamrul Aziz, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment on Board 14/10/2025 1. The appellants/claimants have filed this appeal for enhancement of compensation against award dated 24.11.2023,passed by the learned Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, District Jashpur, in Claim Case No. 30/2020, whereby the learned Tribunal passed award to the tune of Rs.4,85,000/- in favour of the claimants on account of death of Rajkamal. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that on 31.07.2020, at about 6.00 pm, the deceased was returning home along with his mother and uncle and when they reached near Harra Mod, the offending vehicle (Pick up) bearing Registration No. JH-01-DB-1401 driven rashly and negligently by Driver- Manish Kumar /respondent No.2 dashed Rajkamal, consequently, he sustained grievous injuries over his head and various parts of body and died on the spot. He would further submit that the learned Tribunal has assessed notional income of the deceased Rs. 25,000/- per annum; applied multiplier of 15 and further awarded Rs.15,000-15,000/- for loss of estate and funeral expenses and Rs. 40,000-40,000/- towards loss of consortium. He would also submit that the learned Tribunal ought to have considered notional income of the deceased according to the minimum wages matrix applicable in the State of Chhattisgarh. It is further submitted that the learned Tribunal has not awarded compensation for future prospect. He would pray to enhance the award. 3 3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents would oppose. Mr. Qamrul Aziz, learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company would submit that the owner and Driver of the offending vehicle failed to produce valid permit, therefore, the liability has been fastened with the Driver and owner of the offending vehicle, but the learned Tribunal has applied principle of pay and recover. He would contend that the appeal deserves to be dismissed. 4. Ms. Neelam Khan, learned counsel appearing for the respondents No.1 & 2 would oppose the submission made by respective counsels and submit that the burden lies on the Insurance Company to establish the fact that there was no valid permit. The offending vehicle was insured with the Insurance Company, thus, the learned Tribunal committed error of law in exonerating the Insurance company. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6. Perusal of the record would show that the Driver and Owner despite sufficient opportunity failed to produce valid permit, therefore, the learned Tribunal rightly fastened liability with them. The learned Tribunal further applied principle of pay and recover and directed Insurance company to satisfy the award first, appears to be fair. 7. The age of the deceased at the time of accident was 4 years, 7 months and 17 days and the learned Tribunal has considered annual notional income of deceased at Rs.25,000, which appears to be at lower side. 8. In the judgment rendered in the matter of Hitesh Nagjibhai Patel v. Bababhai Nagjibhai Rabari & Anr. (2025 INSC 1070), the Hon’ble Supreme Court reaffirmed the principle of granting “just and fair compensation” in motor accident cases, particularly where a child having suffered injury or passed away, the calculation of loss of income necessarily has to be made on the matrix of minimum wages payable to a skilled worker in the respective State at the relevant point of time. 4 9. In the present case, on conventional head, the learned Tribunal has awarded proper compensation but at the same time failed to award compensation for future prospect; thus, the compensation requires reconsideration and same is being revisited hereinbelow:- Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded by Tribunal Compensation awarded by this COurt 1. Income 25,000/- yearly Rs. 10,300 x 12 = Rs. 1,23,600/- 2. Future Prospect NIL 40 % 49,440 3. Deduction NIL (-) ½ Rs. 86,520/- 4. Multiplier (x) 15 (x) 15 = Rs. 12,97,800/- 5. Loss of Estate Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 15,000/- 6. Funeral expenses Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 15,000/- 7. Loss of Consortium (for appellant No. 1) Rs. 40,000 X 2 = Rs. 80,000/- Rs. 80,000/- 8. TOTAL Rs. 4,85,000/- Rs. 14,07,800/- Accordingly, the total compensation payable to the claimants is assessed at Rs. 14,07,800/-. Since the learned Tribunal has already awarded Rs. 4,85,000/-, the claimants shall be entitled to receive an enhanced compensation of Rs. 9,22,800/- (Rupees Nine Lakh Twenty-Two Thousand Eight Hundred only) in addition to the amount already awarded by the 5 learned Tribunal with interest as awarded by the learned Tribunal from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realization. 12. Insurance Company/respondent No.3 is directed to satisfy the award first and shall be entitled to recover the award amount from the owner and driver of the offending vehicle, in accordance with law. 13. In view of the above, the appeal is allowed in part. Sd/- Rakesh Mohan Pandey JUDGE Nadim