-1- NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1638 of 2024 1 - Smt. Saraswati Sen W/o Khublal Sen Aged About 46 Years Resident Of Village Sarsopuri, Post Puri, Police Station Arjuni, Tahsil And District Dhamtari (C.G.),... (Claimants) 2 - Khublal Sen S/o Hemlal Sen Aged About 56 Years Resident Of Village Sarsopuri, Post Puri, Police Station Arjuni, Tahsil And District Dhamtari (C.G.) ... Appellants versus 1 - Daman Lal Sahu S/o Punamchand Sahu Aged About 38 Years Resident Of Village Sanaud, Police Chowki Kanwar, Tahsil Gurur, District Balod (C.G.), (Driver Of Offending Truck Number C.G. - 21 / F - 8600) 2 - Mohd. Shahrukh Potiyawala S/o Mohd. Sahid Aged About 32 Years Resident Of House No. 222, Bangla Para Gourath Path Road, Narayanpur, Police Station, Tahsil And District Narayanpur (C.G.), (Owner Of Offending Truck Number C.G. - 21 / F - 8600) 3 - I.C.I.C.I. Lombard General Insurance Company Limited Through Branch Manager, Branch Office, Vanijya Bhawan, Devendra Nagar Road, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.), (Insurer Of Offending Truck Number C.G. - 21 / F - 8600) ... Respondents For appellants/claimants : Mr. Anil Kumar Gulati, Advocate For respondent/Insurance Company : Mr. Suraj Patel, Advocate For other respondents : None appears though served Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 18.11.2025 1) Heard on I.A.No.1, application for condonation of delay in filing the instant appeal. 2) Mr. Gulati, learned counsel appearing for the appellants/claimants would submit that this appeal has been preferred by the claimants for enhancement of compensation and there is delay of only 60 days in filing instant appeal. He would further submit that due to poverty, the claimants could not prefer the appeal within limitation and thus, he would pray to condone the delay. REKHA SINGH -2- 3) On the other hand, Mr. Patel, learned counsel appearing for the respondent/Insurance Company would oppose the submissions made by Mr. Gulati. 4) Having considered the submissions made by Mr. Gulati and the reasons assigned in the application, the same is allowed. 5) Delay of 60 days in filing instant appeal is hereby condoned. 6) Heard on admission. 7) The appellants/claimants have filed this appeal for enhancement of compensation against an award passed by the learned Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Link Court Kurud, District Dhamtari (C.G.) in Claim Case No.14/2023 dated 13.03.2024, whereby, the learned Tribunal has passed an award to the tune of Rs.12,92,360/- with interest @ 6% per annum on account of death of Manish Kumar Sen. 8) Mr. Gulati, learned counsel appearing for the appellants/claimants would submit that Manish Kumar Sen was a pillion rider on a motorcycle bearing registration No.C.G.05/AL/4769, on the fateful day i.e. 07.11.2022 and the said motorcycle was dashed by truck bearing registration No.C.G.21F/8600, consequently, he sustained injuries and succumbed to death during course of treatment. He would contend that the parents of the deceased filed a claim case under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, wherein, they pleaded that the age of the deceased was 24 years and earning Rs.500/- per day. He would submit that learned Tribunal has assessed the notional income of the deceased Rs.7800/-per month which is on lower side. He would further submit that in absence of evidence with regard to income, learned Tribunal should have applied minimum wages matrix. He would fairly submit that on other conventional heads, learned Tribunal has passed just and proper -3- compensation. He would pray to enhance the compensation accordingly. 9) On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company would oppose the submissions made by Mr. Gulati. He would submit that the learned Tribunal has passed just and proper compensation. He would further submit that the present appeal deserves to be dismissed. 10) I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 11) Admittedly, the age of the deceased was 24 years and income Rs.500/- per day as pleaded in the claim petition. The claimants could not lead evidence to prove the income of the deceased, therefore, the learned Tribunal assessed income of deceased Rs.7800/- per month. According to the minimum wages matrix applicable in the State of Chhattisgarh, in the month of November, 2022, the admissible minimum wages to unskilled labourer was Rs.9960/-per month and the learned Tribunal should have considered that figure while computing the compensation. Further, learned Tribunal has granted proper compensation for future prospects; funeral expenses; loss of estate and loss of consortium. Thus, the compensation awarded on conventional heads do not require interference. 12) In view of the above-discussed facts, the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal requires reconsideration and same is being revisited herein- below : Sr.No. Heads Compensation awarded by Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1. Income Rs.7800/- x 12= 93,600/- Rs.9960/- x 12 =1,19,520/- 2. Future Prospect 40% of 93,600 = Rs.37,440/- 93,600 + 37,440 = 1,31,040/- 40% of 1,19,520 = Rs.47,808/- 1,19,520 + 47,808 =1,67,328/- -4- 3. Deduction (-) ½ of 1,31,040 = Rs. 65,520/- (-) ½ of 1,67,328/-= Rs.83,664/- 4. Multiplier (x) 18 = Rs.65,520 x 18=11,79,360/- (x) 18 =Rs. 83,664 x 18= 15,05,952/- 5. Loss of Consortium( for appellant No.1) Rs.40,000/- Rs.40,000/- 6. Loss of Consortium (for appellant No.2) Rs.40,000/- Rs.40,000/- 7. Funeral expenses Rs. 16,500/- Rs. 16,500/- 8. Loss of Estate Rs. 16,500/- Rs. 16,500/- 9. Total Rs. 12,92,360/- Rs. 16,18,952/- 13) Accordingly, the amount of compensation of Rs.12,92,360/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.16,18,952/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs.12,92,360/-, the appellant is entitled for an additional amount of Rs.3,26,592/-. The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of application till the date of its realization. The rest of the terms and conditions shall remain intact. 14) Accordingly, this appeal is allowed in part and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Rekha