1 2025:CGHC:58488 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1532 of 2018 1 - Smt. Ujjawala Kundu Wd/o Late Ashok Kundu Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Old Pakhanjur Tahsil Pakhanjur District North Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh. (Claimants), District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh 2 - Manas Kundu S/o Late Ashok Kundu Aged About 20 Years R/o Village Old Pakhanjur Tahsil Pakhanjur District North Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh. (Claimants), District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh ... Appellants versus 1 - Arun Sheel S/o Ratan Sheel Aged About 46 Years R/o Village Shubhpalli Pakhanjur District North Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh (Driver Of The Vehicle), District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh 2 - Shailesh Dubey S/o Dashrath Dubey R/o N.H. 2297 Sirsagate G.E. Road Bhilai 03 District Durg Chhattisgarh (Owner Of The Vehicle), District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 3 - The Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. Through Branch Manager Second Floor Block No. 19 Plot No. 1 South Gangotri Supela Bhilai District Durg Chhattisgarh. (Insurer), District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from the Case Information System) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Appellant :- Mr. Vikas Patel, Advocate on behalf of Mr., VISHAKHA BEOHAR Digitally signed by VISHAKHA BEOHAR 2 P.K. Tulsyan, Advocate For Respondent No. 3:- Ms. Harneet Kaur Khanuja, Advocate ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order On Board 02.12.2025 1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellants/claimants against the award dated 16.05.2018 passed by the learned First Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (F.T.C.), North Bastar, Place Kanker (C.G.) in Claims Case No. 46/2017, whereby a total compensation of ₹24,90,652/- was awarded to the claimants from the date of application till realization, fastening the liability upon the non- applicant No.3. 2. As per the averments made in the claim petition, on 18.02.2017 the deceased, aged about 50 years and engaged in business earning approximately ₹5,00,000/- per annum, was travelling from Raipur to Pakhanjur as an occupant of the offending vehicle bearing Registration No. CG-07/AR/1733. Near the water tank, respondent No. 1 drove the said vehicle in a rash and negligent manner, causing it to collide with the water tank. As a result, the deceased sustained fatal injuries and died on the spot. The offending vehicle was being driven by non- applicant No. 1, owned by non-applicant No. 2, and insured with non- applicant No. 3 (the Insurance Company) at the time of the accident. Being dependents upon the deceased, the claimants filed a claim petition seeking compensation of ₹50,58,329/-. 3 3. The learned Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at ₹18,620/- per month, i.e., ₹2,23,440/- per annum. After applying 25% towards future prospects, the income was taken as ₹23,275/- per month, i.e., ₹2,79,300/- per annum. Upon deducting one-third towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the monthly dependency was assessed at ₹15,517/-, i.e., ₹1,86,204/- per annum. By applying the multiplier of 13, the total loss of dependency was computed at ₹24,20,652/-. In addition, the Tribunal awarded ₹15,000/- towards funeral expenses, ₹40,000/- towards spousal consortium to applicant No. 1, and ₹15,000/- towards loss of estate, thereby determining the total compensation at ₹24,90,652/-. Aggrieved by the said award, the present appeal has been filed by the appellants/claimants. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants submits that the impugned award passed by the Learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Balod, is arbitrary, unjust, and contrary to the settled principles of law, as the Tribunal erred in awarding inadequate compensation under the conventional heads and in not granting consortium to all eligible claimants, contrary to the settled law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. In Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram, (2018) 18 SCC 130 and United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Satinder Kaur @ Satwinder Kaur, (2020) 9 SCC 410, the Supreme Court has categorically held that consortium is payable individually to each eligible claimant—₹40,000/- towards spousal consortium to the widow, ₹40,000/- each towards parental consortium to the children, and ₹40,000/- each towards filial consortium to the parents; however, the 4 Tribunal granted only ₹40,000/- to the spouse, thereby ignoring the mandatory principles governing award of consortium. Further, the Tribunal awarded only ₹15,000/- each towards loss of estate and funeral expenses, which is the bare minimum laid down in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC 680, though the Supreme Court in Satinder Kaur (supra) has clarified that conventional heads require upward revision with inflation, and various High Courts have consistently enhanced these amounts to ₹20,000/-–₹25,000/-. In view of the social-welfare object of the Motor Vehicles Act and the principle that compensation must be “just, fair and reasonable” as reiterated in Bimla Devi v. HRTC, (2009) 13 SCC 530, the claimants are entitled to enhanced sums under consortium, loss of estate and funeral expenses, and the award requires suitable modification. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3/Insurance Company supports the impugned award and submits that the Tribunal, after considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, has rightly awarded compensation, which needs no interference by this Court. 6. None appears for the respondents No. 1 & 2, though served. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 8. Having considered the submissions advanced on behalf of the appellants/claimants and upon perusal of the impugned award, this Court is of the view that the learned Tribunal has fallen in error in 5 awarding inadequate compensation under the conventional heads and in not granting consortium in accordance with the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. In Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram, (2018) 18 SCC 130, and United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Satinder Kaur @ Satwinder Kaur, (2020) 9 SCC 410, it has been unequivocally held that consortium is a separate and distinct head of compensation payable individually to each eligible claimant, and that the quantum fixed in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC 680, is subject to upward revision with the passage of time. Further, as clarified in Satinder Kaur (supra), the conventional heads such as funeral expenses and loss of estate must be enhanced suitably to keep pace with inflation and rising costs. The Tribunal’s award of ₹15,000/- each towards funeral expenses and loss of estate, though in consonance with the minimum fixed in Pranay Sethi, does not reflect a just or reasonable assessment in the present case. Therefore, this Court considers it appropriate to enhance both these heads to ₹18,000/- each, which would meet the ends of justice. Likewise, in view of the law laid down in Magma and Satinder Kaur, and considering a 10% upward revision every three years, the consortium amount is suitably enhanced from ₹40,000/- to ₹48,000/- per eligible claimant, thereby granting a total consortium of ₹48,000 x 2 = ₹96,000/-. Accordingly, the appellants/claimants i.e. wife and son of the deceased would become entitled for total compensation of Rs.25,52,652/- in the following manner:- S.No. Heads Calculation 6 01 Towards loss of dependency Rs. 24,20,652/- 02 Towards consortium along with with increase of 10% in every three years (40,000X2+10% +10%). Rs. 96,000/- 03 Towards loss of estate along with increase of 10% in every three years. Rs. 18,000/- 04 Towards Funeral Expenses along with increase of 10% in every three years. Rs. 18,000/- Total Rs.25,52,652/- 9. Thus, the total compensation is recomputed as Rs. 25,52,652/-. After deducting Rs. 24,90,652/- as awarded by the tribunal, the enhancement would be Rs. 62,000/-. 10. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. The claimants/appellants i.e. wife and son of the deceased shall be entitled for the enhanced amount of Rs. 62,000/- in addition to what is already awarded by the claims Tribunal. The enhanced amount will carry interest @ 6% from the date of enhancement of the award till its realization. The impugned award stands modified to the above extent and rest of the conditions shall remain intact. sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Vishakha