1 2025:CGHC:53024 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1048 of 2022 1 - Sukhnandan Sahu S/o Manharan Sahu Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Dhardeyi, Post Office Bawli, Police Station Pathariya, District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh 2 - Smt. Radha Bai W/o Sukhnandan Sahu Aged About 32 Years R/o Village Dhardeyi, Post Office Bawli, Police Station Pathariya, District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh ... Appellants/Claimants versus 1 - Ram Kumar Sahu S/o Late Shri Radhelal Sahu Aged About 45 Years (Owner Of The Offending Vehicle Xylo Car Bearing Registration No. C. G./07- A W-9432) R/o Village Bampara, Police Station, Tahsil And District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh 2 - Krishna Kumar Sahu S/o Chandrakumar Sahu Aged About 26 Years (Driver Of The Offending Vehicle Xylo Car Bearing HARNEET KAUR Digitally signed by HARNEET KAUR Date: 2025.10.31 10:40:38 +0530 2 Registration No. C. G./07- A W-9432) R/o Village Bampara, Police Station, Tahsil And District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh 3 - Branch Manager Ifco Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd., First Floor, Galaxy Heights, Near I C I C I Bank, Vyapar Vihar, Sanjay Apartment, Bilaspur, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Appellants : Mr. Keshav Dewangan, Advocate For Respondent No. 3 : Ms. Shrejal Gupta on behalf of Mr. Vaibhav Shukla, Advocates SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment On Board 30.10.2025 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 12/07/2022 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mungeli, District Bilaspur (C.G.) in Claim Case No. 19/2021, whereby learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs. 4,80,000/- as compensation to the appellants/claimants for the death of their son namely Roshan Sahu, aged about 15 years. 3 2. Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants would submit that the Claims Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased as Rs. 30,000/- per annum whereas in view of the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in the matter of Hitesh Nagjibhai Patel v. Bababhai Nagjibhai Rabari and Anr.1 decided on 08/08/2025, the deceased, who was a minor at the time of the accident, ought to have been treated as a skilled labourer and as per the minimum wages notification prevalent at that time, his monthly income should be Rs. 9,230/-. Moreover, the Claims Tribunal ought to have applied the multiplier of 18 rather than 15, as such, the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal 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. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking consideration of the facts of the present case particularly, in view of the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in 1 2025 INSC 1070 4 the matter of Hitesh Nagjibhai Patel (supra), the deceased, being a minor, ought to have been treated as a skilled labourer and as per the minimum wage notification, his monthly income ought to have been assessed as Rs. 9,230/- and thereafter, deduction of ½ towards personal expenses ought to have been made and multiplier of 18 ought to have been applied while computing the quantum of compensation. 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 Sethi 2, Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Ors3 and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors 4 , this Court is computing the compensation as below:- Sr. No . Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1. Income Rs. 30,000 p.a. Rs. 9,230/- x 12 = Rs. 1,10,760/- 2. Future Prospect NIL (+) 40% i.e. Rs. 44,304/- = Rs. 1,55,064/- 3. Deduction NIL (-) ½ = Rs. 77,532/- 4. Multiplier (x) 15 = (x) 18 = 2 (2017) 16 SCC 680 3 (2009) 6 SCC 121 4 (2018) 18 SCC 130 5 Rs. 4,50,000/- Rs. 13,95,576/- 5. Funeral Expenses NIL Rs. 16,500/- 6. Loss of Estate NIL Rs. 16,500/- 7. Loss of Parental Consortium NIL Rs. 44,000/- x 2 = Rs. 88,000/- 8. Other Heads Rs. 30,000/- Rs. 1,21,000/- Total Rs. 4,80,000/- Rs. 16,37,576/- 7. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs. 4,80,000/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 16,37,576/-. Hence, the appellants are held entitled for an additional amount of Rs. 11,57,576/-. 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 @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of claim application before the Tribunal i.e. 12/07/2022 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