1 2025:CGHC:36969 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 162 of 2022 1 - Smt. Shalini Sahu W/o Late Natwar Lal Sahu Aged About 29 Years R/o Village B. K. Bahra Ward No. 06, Police Station Khallari, Tahsil Bagbahara, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. 2 - Minor Chitransh Sahu S/o Late Natwar Lal Sahu Aged About 6 Years Minor Through His Natural Gaurdian Mother Smt. Shalini Sahu. R/o Village B. K. Bahra Ward No. 06, Police Station Khallari, Tahsil Bagbahara, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. 3 - Khemraj Sahu S/o Kalaram Sahu Aged About 27 Years R/o Village B. K. Bahra Ward No. 06, Police Station Khallari, Tahsil Bagbahara, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. 4 - Kalaram Sahu S/o Guhan Sahu Aged About 68 Years R/o Village B. K. Bahra Ward No. 06, Police Station Khallari, Tahsil Bagbahara, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. … Appellants versus 1 - Yashwant Vibhar S/o Chainuram Vibhar Aged About 41 Years R/o Village Jamali, Police Station Khallari, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. HARNEET KAUR Digitally signed by HARNEET KAUR Date: 2025.07.30 11:08:54 +0530 2 2 - Branch Manager, The New India Inssurance Company Ltd. F.C.I.Bulding, Vyavsayik Parisar Second Floor, Shyam Square, Pandari Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. (Insurance Company Of Vehicle Passion Pro No. C.G. 06 K/6197 ... Respondents For Appellants : Mr. Kripesh G. Kela, Advocate For Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Deepak Gupta, Advocate SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment On Board 28.07 .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 27/10/2021 passed by learned Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Mahasamund in Claim Case No. H-77/2019, whereby learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs. 16,62,000/- as compensation for the death of Natwar Lal Sahu, aged about 34 years, who ran a shop of Computer Service. 2. Facts of the case relevant for disposal of this appeal are that on 03/03/2019, deceased Natwar Lal Sahu was going from his home towards the market in his motorcycle and 3 while crossing the road near Bazar Chowk at about 8 PM, a motorcycle Passion Pro bearing Registration No. CG 06-K/6197 which was being driven by respondent No. 1 in a rash and negligent manner and high speed collided with the motorcycle of the deceased due to which he suffered greivous injuries and while undergoing treatment in District Hospital, Mahasamund, he succumbed to his injuries and died. On the basis of the report, Crime No. 74/2019 was registered at the Police Station and after investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against respondent No. 1 before the Court for offence punishable under Sections 279, 304A of IPC. 3. Appellants, who are wife, two children and father of the deceased, respectively, filed an application under Section 166 read with Section 140 of the Act of 1988 seeking compensation to the tune of Rs. 53,20,000/- pleading therein that at the time of the incident, deceased was aged about 34 years and was an able-bodied person and used to run a shop namely DG Soft Computer Service near FCI Godown and earned Rs. 18,000/- per month. 4. Respondent No. 1 opposed the claim application and submitted that accident has not been caused by his motorcycle and he has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He further submitted that on the date of the 4 incident, he had valid driving license and the offending motorcycle was duly insured with respondent No. 2 (Insurance Company), therefore, they are liable for payment of compensation, if any. 5. Respondent No. 3 i.e. the Insurance Company also opposed the claim application and submitted that on the date of accident, respondent No. 1 did not have valid driving license and the motorcycle was being plied in breach of the terms and conditions of Insurance policy, therefore, they are not liable for payment of compensation. 6. Learned Claims Tribunal, upon appreciation of pleadings and evidence placed on record by respective parties, held that deceased Natwar Lal Sahu died in the accident arising out of rash and negligent driving of the aforesaid motorcycle which was driven by respondent No. 1. Breach of conditions of insurance policy was not found proven, and after calculating the amount of compensation, awarded Rs. 16,62,000/- as total compensation with interest @ 6 % p.a. from the date of filing of claim application. 7. 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. 8,000/- per month which should be Rs. 10,000/- per month and 5 moreover, Rs. 40,000/- should additionally be awarded under loss of consortium therefore, the instant appeal be allowed and the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal may suitably be enhanced. 8. Learned counsel for respondent No. 3 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. 9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection. 10. Learned Claims Tribunal assessed the monthly income of deceased Natwar Lal Sahu to be Rs. 8,000/-, however, in the opinion of this Court, the monthly income of the deceased should be Rs. 10,000/- (as per minimum wages prescribed at relevant time) and Rs. 1,20,000/- per annum as he worked in the field of computer hardware and had been running a shop for the last 7 years 6 11. 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. 8,000/- x 12 = Rs. 96,000/- Rs. 10,000 x 12 = Rs. 1,20,000/- 2. Future Prospect (+) 40% i.e. Rs. 38,400 = Rs. 1,34,400/- (+) 40% i.e. Rs. 48,000 = Rs. 1,68,000/- 3. Deduction (-) ¼ i.e. Rs. 33,600/- = Rs. 1,00,800/- (-) ¼ i.e. Rs. 42,000/- = Rs. 1,26,000/- 4. Multiplier (x) 15 = Rs. 15,12,000/- (x) 15 = Rs. 18,90,000/- 5. Loss of Estate Rs. 15,000/- (+) 10% = Rs. 16,500/- 6. Funeral Expenses Rs. 15,000/- (+) 10% = Rs. 16,500/- 7. Loss of Consortium Rs. 40,000 x 3 = Rs. 1,20,000/- Rs. 40,000/- x 4 = Rs. 1,60,000/- + 10% = Rs. 1,76,000/- Total Rs. 16,62,000/- Rs. 20,99,000/- 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 7 12. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs. 16,62,000/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 20,99,000/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs. 16,62,000/-, the appellants are held entitled for an additional amount of Rs. 4,37,000/-. The 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 @ 7% per annum from the date of filing of claim application before the Tribunal i.e. 16/07/2019 till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. 13. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed in part and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. The deposit Tribunal shall pass appropriate order with regard to apportionment, investment and disbursement of the enhanced amount of compensation. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Harneet