1 2025:CGHC:55125 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 642 of 2022 1. Gayatri Bai Suryavanshi, W/o Santram, Aged About 50 Years, Village Kosmanda, Police Station & Tahsil Champa, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.). 2. Santram Suryavanshi, S/o Hariram Suryavanshi, Aged About 55 Years, Village Kosmanda, Police Station & Tahsil Champa, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.). ... Appellants/Claimants versus 1. Dinanath Oraon, S/o Santram Oraon, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Village Uchchbhatti, Police Station Champa, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) (Driver). 2. Smt. Manisha Singh, W/o Kanhaiya Singh, Aged About 55 Years, R/o Village Plot Number 310, Ward No.13, Sudarshan Bhavan, T.P. Nagar, Korba Police Station & Tehsil Korba, District Korba (C.G.) (Owner). ... Respondents (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Appellants : Ms. Rajni Soren, Advocate. For Respondent No.2 : Mr. Akash Shrivastava, Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order on Board 12/11/2025 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 dated 04.02.2022, passed in Claim Case No.61/2021 (Gayatri Bai Suryavanshi & Another v. Dinanath Oraon and Another) by the 1st Addl. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.), whereby learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.9,84,200/- as DEEPTI JHA Digitally signed by DEEPTI JHA 2 compensation for the death of Pokhar Kumar, who was aged about 23 years at the time of accident. 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. Claims Tribunal erred in assessing income of deceased as Rs.6,000/- per month which should be Rs.8,860/- as per Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the office of the Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh. Further, the learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.77,000/- under the other conventional heads, which ought to be Rs.36,000/- (i.e. for loss of estate and funeral expenses) and Rs.96,000/- (i.e. for loss of filial consortium). Therefore, the instant appeal be allowed and the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal may suitably be enhanced. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent would submit that the appellants have failed to prove nature of occupation and income of deceased by producing clinching and admissible piece of evidence, hence, the Tribunal is justified in assessing income of deceased on notional basis. The amount of compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is just and proper which does not call for any interference. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection. 5. Learned Claims Tribunal assessed the monthly income of deceased to be Rs.6,000/-, however, in the opinion of this Court, as per the Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the office of Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh, the monthly income of the deceased should be Rs.8,860/- per month (as per minimum wages prescribed at relevant time). Further, though the learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.77,000/- on the 3 other conventional heads, but it ought to be Rs.36,000/- (i.e. for loss of estate and funeral expenses) and Rs.96,000/- (i.e. for loss of filial consortium) respectively. 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 Sethi1, 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.6000 x 12 = Rs.72,000/- Rs.8,860 x 12 = Rs.1,06,320/- 2. Future Prospect (+) 40% (i.e. Rs.28,800/-) = Rs.1,00,800/- (+) 40% (i.e. Rs.42,528/-) = Rs.1,48,848/- 3. Deduction (-) 1/2 (i.e. Rs.50,400/-) = Rs.50,400/- (-) 1/2 (i.e. Rs.74,424/-) = Rs.74,424/- 4. Multiplier (x) 18 = Rs.9,07,200/- (x) 18 = Rs.13,39,632/- 5. Loss of Dependeny Rs.50,400 x 18 = Rs.9,07,200/- Rs.74,424 x 18 = Rs.13,39,632/- 6. Conventional Head (Loss of Funeral expenses + Loss of Estate) Rs.77,000/- Rs. 36,000/- 7. Loss of filial consortium NA Rs.48,000/- x 2 = Rs.96,000/- Total Rs.9,84,200/- Rs.14,71,632/- 7. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs.9,84,200/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.14,71,632/-. 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 4 Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs.9,84,200/-, the appellants are held entitled for an additional amount of Rs.4,87,432/-. The concerned respondents are directed to deposit the amount of compensation as enhanced by this Court within a period of 3 months 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 filing of the claim application before the Tribunal, i.e., 27.07.2021 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