1 MAC No. 916 of 2022 2025:CGHC:42586 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 916 of 2022  Ramesh Sahu S/o Shri Manglu Ram Nishad, Aged About 60 Years, R/o Village Kannojiyakapa (Temri), Police Station, Tahsil and District - Mungeli, Chhattisgarh...........(Claimant) ... Appellant versus 1. Ravindra Kumar Verma S/o Roop Narayan Verma, Aged About 40 Years, Employee of C.G.E.B. Village- Bansakra (Employee Residential Colony, Simga), Police Station and Tahsil Simga, District- Balouda Bazar, Chhattisgarh. (Owner and Driver of the offending vehicle) 2. The Branch Manager Ifco Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd., First Floor, Galaxy Heights, Near I.C.I.C.I. Bank, Vypar Vihar, Sanjay Apartment, Bilaspur, Tahsil and District - Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. (Insurer of the offending vehicle). ... Respondents For Appellant :- Mr. Keshav Dewangan, Advocate. For Respondent No.2 :- Ms. Vartika Shrivastava, Advocate, on behalf of Mr. P.R. Patankar, Advocate. ANKIT KUMAR SINGH Digitally signed by ANKIT KUMAR SINGH Date: 2025.08.25 10:40:40 +0530 2 MAC No. 916 of 2022 SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment On Board 21.08.2025 1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “Act of 1988”) has been preferred by the appellant seeking enhancement in the amount of compensation, challenging the impugned award dated 09.02.2022 passed by the 1st Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mungeli, District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh (for short “Claims Tribunal”) in Claim Case No. 55/2019, whereby learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of 6,30,421/- ₹ as compensation along with interest to the claimant. 2. Brief facts of the case, are that the appellant/claimant, when the claimant on his motorcycle was coming toward his village Kannojiyakapa from somewhere, at Ramakapa, the offending vehicle/swift car bearing registration No.CG- 04-LB-9933 dashed the motorcycle of the appellant/claimant due to which he suffered injuries. After getting treatment, the claimant is found to be suffered permanent disability to the extent of 40%- 3 MAC No. 916 of 2022 45% against which the appellant preferred claim application before the Tribunal. Thereafter, for enhancement of the award granted by the Claims Tribunal, the appellant/claimant has preferred the instant appeal. 3. Mr. Keshav Dewangan, 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. The Claims Tribunal erred in assessing income of appellant as ₹5,000/- per month which should be 6,230/- as per ₹ Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the office of the Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh. It is further contended that the Claims Tribunal has erred in awarding compensation under the heads of ‘transportation/special died/assistant/physical pain and mental agony’ which is required to be enhanced and, therefore, the instant appeal be allowed and the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal may suitably be enhanced. 4 MAC No. 916 of 2022 4. Ms. Vartika Shrivastava, learned counsel for the respondent No.2, 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. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and gone through the records minutely. 6. Learned Claims Tribunal assessed the monthly income of appellant/claimant to be ₹5,000/-, 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 appellant/claimant should be ₹6,230/- (as per minimum wages prescribed at relevant time) and 74,760/- per annum. Moreover, ₹ amount awarded under the heads of 5 MAC No. 916 of 2022 ‘transportation/special died/assistant/physical pain and mental agony’ is liable to be enhanced. This Court is computing the compensation as below:- Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1. Income ₹ 5,000 x 12 = ₹ 60,000/- ₹ 6,230 x 12 = 74,760/- ₹ 2. Loss of earning capacity 40% of the early income i.e. ₹ 24,000/- (loss of earning capacity) 45% of the total earning income i.e. ₹33,642/- (loss of earning capacity) 3. Multiplier (x) 7= ₹ 1,68,000/- (loss of earning capacity) (x) 7 = ₹ 2,35,494/- (loss of earning capacity) 4. Medical Bills ₹ 4,12,421/- ₹ 4,12,421/- 5. Transportat ion The Claims Tribunal has awarded a sum of ₹50,000/- for Sr. No.5 to 8. ₹ 20,000/- 6. Special diet ----do---- 10,000/- ₹ 7. Assistant ----do------ 10,000/- ₹ 8. Pain and suffering ----do----- 50,000/- ₹ Total ₹ 6,30,421/- ₹ 7,37,915/- 7. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of 6,30,421/- ₹ awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to ₹7,37,915/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of 6,30,421/- ₹ , the appellants 6 MAC No. 916 of 2022 are held to be entitled to an additional amount of ₹1,07,494/- . The concerned respondent is directed to deposit the amount of compensation as enhanced by this Court within a period of three 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. 03.08.2019 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 Ankit