-1- NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 2368 of 2024 1 - Smt. Savita Tandan W/o Late Amitabh Anand Tandan Aged About 34 Years R/o Ward No. 56, Sai Rajendra Nagar, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Minor Ku. Shristi Tandan D/o Late Amitabh Anand Tandan Aged About 9 Years Minor On Behalf Of Through Their Legal Guardian Mother Smt. Savita Tandan Appellant No. 1, R/o Ward No. 56 Sai Rajendra Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3 - Minor Anshu Tandan S/o Late Amitabh Anand Tandan Aged About 7 Years Minor On Behalf Of Through Their Legal Guardian Mother Smt. Savita Tandan Appellant No. 1, R/o Ward No. 56 Sai Rajendra Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 4 - Smt. Dhanbai Tandan W/o Late Khemraj Tandan Aged About 62 Years Minor On Behalf Of Through Their Legal Guardian Mother Smt. Savita Tandan Appellant No. 1, R/o Ward No. 56 Sai Rajendra Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Claimants versus 1 - Uady Shankar Jendre S/o Uttra Kumar Jendre Aged About 29 Years R/o Village - Bijradih, Police Station Gidhpuri, District Balodabazar Chhattisgarh. (Driver Of Vehicle Motor Cycle Bearing Registration No. Cg/04/mv/7615) 2 - Lalit Kumar Jendre S/o Bhuwan Lal Jendre Aged About 37 Years R/o Village Amavash, Police Station Tumgaon, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. (Owner Of Vehicle Motor Cycle Bearing Registration No. Cg/04/mv/7615) 3 - The Branch Manager, The Tata Aig General Insurance Company Limited Through Branch Manager, Branch Office, Walfort Zone, 1st Floor, Office No. 106-7, Bilaspur Road, Near Fafadih Chowk, Raipur, Tahsil And District Raipur Chhattisgrh. (Insurer Of Vehicle Motor Cycle Bearing Registration No. Cg/04/mv/7615) ... Respondents For Appellants/Claimants : Ms. Pooja Yadav, Advocate holding the brief of Shivendu Pandya,Advocate For respondent No.3 : Ms. Santoshi Yadav, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 19.11.2025 REKHA SINGH -2- 1) Heard on I.A.No.1, application for condonation of delay in filing the instant appeal. 2) Ms. Yadav, 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 154 days in filing instant appeal. She would further submit that due to poverty, the claimants could not prefer the appeal within limitation and thus, she would pray to condone the delay. 3) On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondent/Insurance Company would oppose the submissions made by Ms. Yadav. 4) Having considered the submissions made by Ms. Yadav and the reasons assigned in the application, the same is allowed. 5) Delay of 154 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 Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Mahasamund (C.G.) in Claim Case No.07/2023 dated 18.03.2024, whereby, the learned Tribunal has passed an award to the tune of Rs.19,43,920/- with interest @ 9% per annum on account of death of Amitabh Anand Tandon. 8) Ms. Yadav, learned counsel appearing for the appellants/claimants would submit that on 07.02.2022, the motorbike of the deceased Amitabh Anand Tandon was dashed by driver of motorcycle bearing registration No.H.F. Delux/C.G./04/MV/7615 by driving it rashly and negligently, resultantly, he sustained injuries and during course of treatment died on 08.02.2022. She would further submit that age of the deceased was 36 years and he was working as manager in a shop run by Bhojram Nagwani and earning Rs.15,000/- per month. She would contend that the claimants submitted Ex.P/21 to prove the income of the deceased and examined Bhojram Nagwani AW3. It is argued that the learned Tribunal failed to consider the certificate -3- Ex.P/21 issued by Bhojram Nagwani and considered the notional monthly income of the deceased Rs.9280/- according to the minimum wages matrix. She would further contend that on other conventional heads, learned Tribunal has not granted adequate amount of compensation. She would pray to enhance the compensation. 9) On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company would oppose the submissions made by Ms. Yadav. She would submit that claimants failed to prove income of the deceased and the learned Tribunal applied minimum wages matrix to assess the compensation. She would further submit that the learned Tribunal has passed just and proper compensation on other conventional heads. She would lastly 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) The claimants pleaded that the deceased was working as manager in a shop run by Bhojram Nagwani AW3. A certificate Ex.P/21 was issued by Bhojram Nagwani to the effect that the deceased was earning Rs.500/- per day and Rs.15,000/- per month as he was working on the post of manager. Bhojram Nagwani AW3 in his evidence stated that the deceased was working in his shop since 10 years. He admitted in cross-examination that he has not brought any document with regard to registration of shop. He further admitted that Ex.P/21 does not contain date. He also admitted that in his shop, five employees are working but he does not maintain any attendance register. 12) Learned Tribunal found the document Ex.P/21 suspicious and discarded it. The findings recorded by the learned Tribunal appears to be proper. Bhojram Nagwani AW3 and the claimants could not establish the fact that the deceased was working with shop of Bhojram Nagwani and earning Rs.500/- per day in absence of cogent evidence. -4- 13) Further, learned Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased applying minimum wages matrix prevalent on the date of accident i.e. Rs.9280/-. Learned Tribunal deducted 1/4th of monthly income of deceased for personal and living expenses looking to the number of dependents; applied multiplier of 15; granted 40% additional compensation for loss of future prospects; awarded Rs.15,000/- for loss of estate; Rs.15,000/- for funeral expenses and Rs.1,60,000/- for loss of consortium. Learned Tribunal has awarded just and proper compensation to the claimants. 14) Taking into consideration the above-discussed facts, I do not find any good ground to interfere with the award passed by the learned Tribunal. Accordingly, this appeal fails and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Rekha