1 2025:CGHC:59956 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 649 of 2024 1 - Sukaitri Nagesh W/o Ledu Ram Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Purkela, Post Raghunathpur, P.S. And Tahsil Lundra, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh 2 - Ledu Ram S/o Late Sohan Ram Aged About 48 Years R/o Village Purkela, Post Raghunathpur, P.S. And Tahsil Lundra, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh ... Appellants/Claimants Versus 1 - Rajesh Sahu S/o Vijay Sahu Aged About 25 Years Occupation Vehicle Driver, R/o Chandni Chowk, Ward No. 23, Mayapur, Ambikapur, P.S. And Tahsil Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh------ (Vehicle Driver) 2 - Sunil Bahadur S/o Ayodhya Bahadur Occupation Vehicle Owner, R/o Banaras Road, Bhagwanpur (In Front Of Hotel Bandhan), Ambikapur, P.S. Gandhinagar, Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh----- (Vehicle Owner) 3 - Branch Manager, Magma H.D.I. General Insurance Company Limited, Branch Office Kirti Complex, Rajendra Nagar Park, Ring Road, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh------ (Insurance Company) ... Respondents For Appellants/Claimants : Mr. C. Jayant K. Rao, Advocate For Respondent No. 3/ Insurance Company For Other Respondents : : Ms. Harneet Kaur, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. Sourabh Sharma, Advocate None Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment on Board 10/12/2025 1. The appellants/claimants have filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act for enhancement of compensation assailing the award passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Digitally signed by RAMESH KUMAR VATTI Date: 2025.12.10 19:33:16 +0530 2 Ambikapur (Surguja) (C.G.) in Claim Case No. 162/2022 dated 22.11.2023, whereby the learned Claims Tribunal has passed an award to the tune of Rs.10,29,600/- with interest @ 7% per annum on account of death of Shyamlal. 2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that on 02.07.2022, while deceased Shamlal along with his nephew was going on his Motorcylce bearing registration No. CG-15/DF-7854 from Shivpur to Batauli, at about 01:00 pm, respondent No. 1/driver of vehicle- Chota-Hathi bearing registration No. UP-64/BT-1293 by driving it in a rash and negligent manner, dashed the motorcycle of deceased, resultantly, deceased- Shyamlal sustained injuries and succumbed to those injuries. 3. Mr. C. Jayant K. Rao, learned counsel appearing for the appellants/claimants would submit that on 02.07.2022, the motorcycle of deceased- Shyamlal was dashed by the offending vehicle- Chota- Hathi (Pickup) bearing registration No. UP-64/BT-1293. He would contend that in the said accident, deceased sustained injuries and succumbed to death. He would submit that the claimants/appellants No. 1 & 2 who are parents of deceased- Shayamlal, filed claim case under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, wherein they pleaded that at the time of accident, the age of the deceased was 28 years and earning Rs.12,000/- per month as deceased was a Mason. He would further submit that the learned Claims Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased Rs.7,000/- per month which is at lower side. He would contend that in absence of evidence, the learned Claims Tribunal should have applied the minimum wages matrix prevailing on the date of accident. He would further contend that the learned Claims Tribunal has failed to grant compensation for loss of consortium to 3 claimants/parents. He would pray to enhance the compensation accordingly. 4. On the other hand, Ms. Harneet Kaur, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 3/Insurance Company would oppose. She would submit that the claimants have failed to prove the income of the deceased. She would contend that the learned Claims Tribunal has awarded just and proper compensation, therefore, the appeal filed by the appellants/claimants deserves to be dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the learned Claims Tribunal with utmost circumspection. 6. The appellants/claimants pleaded that the deceased was a Mason and earning Rs.12,000/- per month, but they failed to adduce documentary evidence to prove this fact, therefore, the learned Claims Tribunal rightly treated the deceased an unskilled labourer and the finding recorded by the learned Claims Tribunal in this regard appears to be proper. The learned Claims Tribunal assessed the monthly notional income of the deceased Rs.7,000/- which appears to be at lower side. The learned Claims Tribunal should have applied the minimum wages matrix prevailing of the date of accident. The minimum wages admissible to an unskilled labour in the month of July, 2022 was Rs.9,540/- and the learned Claims Tribunal should have taken that figure into account while computing the income of the deceased. The learned Claims Tribunal further committed error by not granting compensation for loss consortium to the claimants/parents. The claimants are entitled for loss consortium a sum of Rs.40,000/- each with additional amount of 10% as accident occurred in the month of 4 July 2022 and 03 years have already passed. Accordingly, the compensation requires reconsideration. 7. Taking into consideration the aforesaid discussion and in light of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in the matter of National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi, reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680, this Court is computing the compensation and same is being revisited herein below:- Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1. Income as per minimum wages Rs.7,000/- per month Rs.9,540/- 2. Future prospect 40% Rs.2,800/- + Rs.7,000/- = Rs.9,800/- Rs.3,816/- + Rs.9,540/- = Rs.13,356/- 3. Deduction of 50% towards personal expenses Rs.9,800 – Rs.4,900= Rs.4,900/- per month Rs.13,356 – 6,678 = Rs.6,678/- per month 4. Per month Income of the deceased Rs.4,900/- Rs.6,678/- 5. Annual Income of the deceased Rs.4,900/- x 12 = Rs.58,800/- per annum Rs.6,678 x 12 = Rs.80,136/- per annum 6. Multiplier of 17 Rs.58,800/- x 17 = Rs.9,99,600/- Rs.80,136/- x 17 = Rs.13,62,312/- 7. Loss of consortium to claimants/parents - Nil - Rs.88,000/- 8. Funeral Expenses Rs.15,000/- Rs.15,000/- 9. Loss of Estate Rs. 15,000/- Rs.15,000/- Total : Rs.10,29,600/- Rs.14,80,312/- 8. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs.10,29,600/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.14,80,312/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs.10,29,600/-, the appellants/claimants are held entitled for an additional amount of 5 Rs.4,50,712/-. The concerned respondent No.3/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the amount of compensation as enhanced by this Court within a period of 03 months from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 7% per annum from date of filing of claim application before the Tribunal till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. 9. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part with modification in the impugned award to the above extent. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge vatti