1 2025:CGHC:52179 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1855 of 2024 1 - The New India Insurance Company Limited Rama Trade Center, Second Floor, Behind Uti Building Rajiv Plaza Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh(Wrongly Mentined Insurance) Through Authorized Signatory Assistant Manager, T.P. Claim Hub, Old Bus Stand Of Bilspur Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Smt. Heeramati Wd/o Late Bhola Aged About 50 Years R/o Chirmiri, Thana And Tehsil Chrimiri, District Koriya Chhattisgarh 2 - Urmila D/o Late Bhola Aged About 33 Years R/o Chirmiri, Thana And Tehsil Chrimiri, District Koriya Chhattisgarh 3 - Poonam D/o Late Bhola Aged About 18 Years R/o Chirmiri, Thana And Tehsil Chrimiri, District Koriya Chhattisgarh 4 - Anurag Verma S/o Bharat Verma, R/o Ramnagar Bhilai, Thana Bhilai, District Durg Chhattisgarh (Driver Of Car No. Cg-10-Fa-5245) 5 - Vinay Tiwari S/o Lalji Tiwari, R/o Village Singhat Post Banjaridand, Thana And Tehsil Chirmiri, District Koriya Chhattisgarh (Registered Owner Of Car No. C.G, 10/fa-5245) ... Respondent(s) NIRMALA RAO 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Appellants : Shri B.N. Nande, Advocate. For Respondents No.1 to 3 : Shri Ramsajiwan, Advocate. For Respondents No.4 & 5 : None. Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 27.10.2025 1. The Insurance Company has challenged the quantum of compensation awarded by the learned Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chirmiri, District Koriya, Chhattisgarh vide award dated 2.3.2024 whereby the learned Tribunal has passed an award to the tune of Rs.15,61,920/- alongwith interest @ 7.5% per annum on account of death of Raju Kumar. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that on 28.2.2020, deceased – Raju Kumar aged about 30 years was going to attend a marriage alongwith his friends in a car bearing registration No.C.G.10 FA 5245. He would contend that due to rash and negligent driving, the driver lost control of the vehicle, which turned turtle. Consequently, the deceased sustained injuries and succumbed to death. He would contend that admittedly, the deceased was a bachelor and that the claim case was filed by mother and sisters of the deceased. He would contend that the learned Tribunal has deducted 1/3rd towards the personal and living expenses of the deceased. This should be 50% according to the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Sarla Verma & Ors Vs Delhi Transport Corp. & Anr, reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents would oppose the submissions made by counsel for the appellants. He would 3 contend that though the deceased was a bachelor but looking to the number of dependents, the learned Tribunal has rightly deducted 1/3rd towards the personal and living expenses of the deceased. He would submit that the appeal preferred by the Insurance Company deserves to be dismissed. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents present on the record with utmost circumspection. 5. A persual of the record would show that the deceased was a bachelor. The claim case was filed by his mother and sisters, who were dependent on his income. The claimants have not led any evidence to establish the fact that the deceased was a married person. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Sarla Verma (supra), in paragraph 32 while dealing with the issue of deduction, held as under: “32. Thus even if the deceased is survived by parents and siblings, only the mother would be considered to be a dependant, and 50% would be treated as the personal and living expenses of the bachelor and 50% as the contribution to the family. However, where family of the bachelor is large and dependant on the income of the deceased, as in a case where he has a widowed mother and large number of younger non-earning sisters or brothers, his personal and living expenses may be restricted to one-third and contribution to the family will be taken as two-third.” 6. In the present case, the learned Tribunal has deducted 1/3rd for personal and living expenses of the deceased which appears to be erroneous according to the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Sarla Verma (supra). The deduction ought to have been 50%. 7. On the other hand, held that the learned Tribunal has awarded just and proper compensation. 4 8. Taking into consideration the above-discussed facts and the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the compensation requires recomputation and same is revisited herein below: Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded by Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1. Income Rs. 7,000 x12 = Rs. 84,000/- Rs. 7,000 x 12 = Rs. 84,000/- 2. Future Prospect 40% - 33,600/- (84,000 + 33,600 = 1,17,600/-) 40% - 33,600/- (84,000 + 33,600 = 1,17,600/-) 3. Deduction (-) 1/3rd (39,160/-) (1,17,600 – 39,160 = 78,440/- (-) 50% (58,800/-) (Rs.1,17,600-58,800) = Rs. 58,800/- 4. Multiplier (x) 18 = Rs. (78,440 x 18 = 14,11,920/-) (x) 18 = Rs. (58,800 x 18 = 10,58,400/-) 5. Loss of Estate Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 15,000/- 6. Funeral expenses Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 15,000/- 7. Loss of Consortium to claimants No.1 to 3 Rs. 1,20,000/- Rs. 1,20,000/- TOTAL Rs. 17,90,600/- Rs. 12,08,400/- 9. For the reasons mentioned herein-above, the appeal is allowed in part. The amount of compensation of Rs.17,90,600/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is reduced to Rs.12,08,400/-. The claimants are entitled to get Rs.12,08,400/- in place of Rs.17,90,600/-. The award is modified to the above extent. 10. No order as to costs. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nimmi