Page No.1 of 5 IN MAC-1035-2022 2025:CGHC:59987 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1035 of 2022 [Arising out of award dt. 30.03.2022, passed in Claim Case No.184/2021 (Smt. Sita Nishad and others v. Ravi Kumar Panagar and others) by the 8th Addl. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur (CG)] 1 - Smt. Sita Nishad W/o Late Jhuluram Nishad Aged About 29 Years R/o Village - Achanakpur, Police Station Pandatarai, District - Kabirdham (C.G.), At Present R/o Devri Khurd, Police Station - Torwa, Tahsil And District - Bilaspur (C.G.) (Claimants) 2 - Bharti Nishad D/o Late Jhuluram Nishad Aged About 10 Years Minor Represented Through Mother Smt. Sita Nishad, R/o Village - Achanakpur, Police Station Pandatarai, District - Kabirdham (C.G.) At Present R/o Devri Khurd, Police Station - Torwa, Tahsil And District - Bilaspur (C.G.) 3 - Arti Nishad D/o Late Jhuluram Nishad Aged About 10 Years Minor Represented Through Mother Smt. Sita Nishad, R/o Village Achanakpur, Police Station Pandatarai, District - Kabirdham (C.G.) At Present R/o Devri Khurd, Police Station - Torwa, Tahsil And District - Bilaspur (C.G.) 4 - Gangadas S/o Late Jhuluram Nishad Aged About 6 Years Minor Represented Through Mother Smt. Sita Nishad, R/o Village Achanakpur, Police Station Pandatarai, District - Kabirdham (C.G.) At Present R/o Devri Khurd, Police Station - Torwa, Tahsil And District - Bilaspur (C.G.) 5 - Bajarha Nishad S/o Late Sukalu Nishad Aged About 54 Years R/o Village Achanakpur, Police Station - Pandatarai, District - Kabirdham (C.G.) At Present Of Devri Khurd, Police Station - Torwa, Tahsil And District - Bilaspur (C.G.) SAIFAN KHAN Digitally signed by SAIFAN KHAN Page No.2 of 5 IN MAC-1035-2022 6 - Sahebin Bai W/o Bajarha Nishad Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Achanakpur, Police Station - Pandatarai, District - Kabirdham (C.G.), At Present R/o Devri Khurd, Police Station - Kawardha, Tahsil And District - Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Appellants Versus 1 - Ravi Kumar Panagar S/o Late Vishwanath Panagar Aged About 31 Years R/o Village - Mohgaon, Police Station - Kawardha, Tahsil - Kabirdham, District - Kabirdham (C.G.) (Driver Of Vehicle Car No. C.G.-09-J-8899) 2 - Ganesh Vishwakarma Lalaram Vishwakarma Aged About 30 Years R/o Raghupara, Police Station - Bodla, Tahsil - Kabirdham, District Kabirdham (C.G.) (Owner Of Vehicle Car No. C.G.-09-J- 8899) 3 - I.C.I.C.I. Lombard General Insurance Company Limited Through The Branch Manager, Branch Office Ground Floor, Commercial Building - Devendra Nagar Road, Raipur, Tahsil And District - Raipur (C.G.) (Insurer Of Vehicle Car No. C.G.-09-J-8899) ... Respondents [Cause-title taken from Case Information System (CIS)] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Appellants : Ms. Pranoti Das, Advocate For Respondent No.3 : Mr. Suraj Patel, Advocate on behalf of Mr. S.R. Amin, Advocate ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Single Bench: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal (Order on Board) 10.12.2025 1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short the “Act of 1988”) has been preferred by the appellants/claimants seeking enhancement of amount of compensation, challenging the impugned award dt. 30.03.2022, passed in Claim Case No.184/2021 (Smt. Sita Nishad and others v. Ravi Kumar Panagar and others) by the 8th Addl. Motor Accident Page No.3 of 5 IN MAC-1035-2022 Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur (CG), whereby learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.21,67,812/- as compensation for the death of Jhuluram Nishad, who died in road accident occurred on 27.06.2020. 2. Learned counsel for the appellants would submit that learned Claims Tribunal has erred in awarding less amount of compensation in the facts of the case. The learned Claims Tribunal has erred in awarding Rs.40,000/- x 6 = Rs.2,40,000/- on the head of loss of consortium to the dependents of the deceased, whereas it ought to have been Rs.44,000 x 6 = Rs.2,64,000/-. Further, though the learned Claims Tribunal has awarded Rs.15,000/- each on the head of loss of estate and funeral expenses, but it ought to have been Rs.44,000/- on each head. Therefore, the instant appeal be allowed and the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal may suitably be enhanced. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents would support the impugned award and submits that the amount of compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is just and proper which does not call for any interference. Hence, the instant appeal is liable to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection. Page No.4 of 5 IN MAC-1035-2022 5. In the case at hand, though the learned Claims Tribunal has awarded Rs.15,000/- each on the heads of loss of estate and funeral expenses, but it ought to have been Rs.44,000/- on each head and, further, the learned Claims Tribunal has also erred in awarding only Rs.40,000/- x 6 = Rs.2,40,000/- on the head of loss of consortium to the appellants, whereas it ought to have been Rs.44,000 x 6 = Rs.2,64,000/-. Therefore, in the considered opinion of this Court, the amount of compensation awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal is liable to be enhanced. 6. Thus, in light of the aforesaid discussion and in light of the judgments of the Supreme Court rendered in the matters of National Insurance Company Ltd. V. Pranay Sethi 1, 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 the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1. Income Rs.8860 x 12 = Rs.1,06,320/- Rs.8860 x 12 = Rs.1,06,320/- 2. Future Prospect (+) 40% (i.e. Rs.42,528/-) = Rs.1,48,848/- (+) 40% (i.e. Rs.42,528/-) = Rs.1,48,848/- 3. Deduction (-) 1/4 (i.e. (-) 1/4 (i.e. 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 Page No.5 of 5 IN MAC-1035-2022 Rs.37,212/-) = Rs.1,11,636/- Rs.37,212/-) = Rs.1,11,636/- 4. Multiplier (x) 17 = Rs.18,97,812/- (x) 17 = Rs.18,97,812/- 5. Loss of Estate Rs.15,000/- Rs.16,500/- 6. Funeral Expenses Rs.15,000/- Rs.16,500/- 7. Loss of Consortium Rs.40,000/- x 6 = Rs.2,40,000/- Rs.44,000 x 6 = Rs.2,64,000/- Total Rs.21,67,812/- Rs.21,94,812/- 7. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs.21,67,812/- is enhanced to Rs.21,94,812/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs.21,67,812/-, the appellants are held entitled for an additional amount of Rs.27,000/-. The concerned respondents are directed to deposit the amount of compensation as enhanced by this Court within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 9% per annum from the date of claim application before the Tribunal till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. 8. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed in part and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge s@if