1 2025:CGHC:59984 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1165 of 2023 1 - Sushil Kumbhkar S/o Fagu Kumbhkar, Aged About 49 Years R/o Village Pipariya, Police Station Pipariya, Tahsil Kawardha, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh. 2 - Urvashi Kumbhkar W/o Sushil Kumbhkar, Aged About 46 Years R/o Village Pipariya, Police Station Pipariya, Tahsil Kawardha, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh. 3 - Reena Kumbhkar D/o Sushil Kumbhkar, Aged About 26 Years R/o Village Pipariya, Police Station Pipariya, Tahsil Kawardha, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh. 4 - Neelu Kumbhkar D/o Sushil Kumbhkar, Aged About 24 Years R/o Village Pipariya, Police Station Pipariya, Tahsil Kawardha, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh. ... Appellants/Claimants versus 1 - Sushil Kumbhkar S/o Fagu Kumbhkar, Aged About 49 Years R/o Village Pipariya, Police Station Pipariya, Tahsil Kawardha, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh. HARNEET KAUR Digitally signed by HARNEET KAUR Date: 2025.12.10 17:10:30 +0530 2 2 - Urvashi Kumbhkar W/o Sushil Kumbhkar, Aged About 46 Years R/o Village Pipariya, Police Station Pipariya, Tahsil Kawardha, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh. 3 - Reena Kumbhkar D/o Sushil Kumbhkar, Aged About 26 Years R/o Village Pipariya, Police Station Pipariya, Tahsil Kawardha, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh. 4 - Neelu Kumbhkar D/o Sushil Kumbhkar, Aged About 24 Years R/o Village Pipariya, Police Station Pipariya, Tahsil Kawardha, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Appellants : Mr. Chandrikaditya Pandey on behalf of Mr. Dharmesh Shrivastava, Advcoates For Respondents 1 & 2 : Mr. Praveen Dhurandhar, Advocate For Respondent No. 3 : Ms. Harneet Kaur, Advocate SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment On Board 10.12.2025 1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “Act of 1988”) has been preferred by the appellants/claimants seeking enhancement of amount of compensation, challenging the impugned award dated 05/05/2023 passed by learned 2nd Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kawardha, District Kabirdham 3 (C.G.) in Claim Case No. 91/2021, whereby learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs. 11,39,978/- as compensation to the appellants/claimants for the death of Rahul Kumbhkar, aged about 21 years, who worked as a Sculptor (Murtikar). 2. Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants would submit that the Claims Tribunal has erred in assessing the monthly income of the deceased as Rs. 6,812/- whereas it ought to be Rs. 10,630/- as per the minimum wages notification prevalent on the date of the accident. Moreover, the Claims Tribunal has only granted Rs. 80,000/- under loss of consortium, whereas it ought to have granted Rs. 40,000/- x 4 = Rs. 1,60,000/-, as such, the compensation amount may suitably be enhanced. 3. Learned counsel for respondent No. 3 would support the impugned award and submit that the compensation awarded by learned Claims Tribunal is just and proper and does not warrant any interference by this Court. 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. A careful perusal of the record would show that the Claims Tribunal has assessed the monthly income of the 4 deceased as Rs. 6,812/- whereas it ought to be Rs. 10,630/- as per the minimum wages notification prevalent on the date of the accident and the Claims Tribunal has only granted Rs. 80,000/- under loss of consortium which should be Rs. 1,60,000/-. 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. 6,812/- x 12 = Rs. 81,744/- Rs. 10,630/- x 12 = Rs. 1,27,560/- 2. Future Prospect (+) 40% = Rs. 1,14,442/- (+) 40% = Rs. 1,78,584/- 3. Deduction (-) ½ = Rs. 57,221/- (-) ½ = Rs. 89,292/- 4. Multiplier (x) 18 = Rs. 10,29,978/- (x) 18 = Rs. 16,07,256/- 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/- x 2 = Rs. 40,000/- x 4 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 5 Rs. 80,000/- = Rs. 1,60,000/- Total Rs. 11,39,978/- Rs. 17,97,256/- 7. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs. 11,39,978/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 17,97,256/-. Hence, the claimants are held entitled for an additional amount of Rs. 6,57,278/-. Respondent No. 3 is 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 @ 7% per annum from the date of filing of claim application before the Tribunal i.e. 06/12/2021 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 Harneet