1 2025:CGHC:56984 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 984 of 2023 1 - Smt. Sundari Urav, W/o. Radhey Urav, Aged About 47 Years, R/o. Balrampur Khutanpara, Thana & District Balrampur Chhattisgarh. Hall Mukam- Near Paddy Mandi Torva, Thana - Torva Tahsil & District – Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Radhey Urav, S/o. Manbodh Urav, Aged About 49 Years, R/o. Balrampur Khutanpara, Thana & District Balrampur Chhattisgarh. Hall Mukam- Near Paddy Mandi Torva, Thana - Torva Tahsil & District – Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellants versus 1 - Santosh Dey, S/o. Amul Dey, Aged About 42 Years, R/o. Radhakrishna Nagar, Ganesh Mode, Balrampur, Thana Balrampur, Tahsil And District Balrampur, Chhattisgarh. (Driver Of The Offending Vehicle Pickup No. C.G.10/DQ/5126). 2 - Dharmendra Singh, S/o. Khakhan Singh, Aged About 28 Years, R/o. Mahrajganj Gandhi Chowk, Ganesh Mode, Thana Balrampur, Tahsil & District Balrampur, Chhattisgarh. (Owner Of The Offending Vehicle Pickup No. CG10/DQ/5126) ASHOK SAHU Digitally signed by ASHOK SAHU Date: 2025.11.24 16:58:55 +0530 2 3 - I.C.I.C.I. Lombard General Insurance Company Limited, Through Branch Manager, Ground Floor, Commercial Bhawan, Devendra Nagar Road Raipur, Tahsil And District – Raipur, Chhattisgarh. (Insurer Of The Offending Vehicle Pickup No. CG- 10/DQ/5126) ... Respondents For Appellant : Mr. A.L.Singroul, Advocate For Respondents No.1 & 2. : Mr. Syed Afaque Hussain, Advocate on behalf of Lavkush Kumar Sahu, Advocate For Respondent No.3 : None appeared (Single Bench) Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment on Board 24.11.2025 1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has been preferred by the appellants/ claimants seeking enhancement of the amount of compensation, challenging the impugned award dated 21.11.2022 passed by learned Eighth Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur in Claim Case No.33/2021, by which the claim application of the claimants has been allowed and an amount of compensation to the tune of Rs. 14,10,320/- has been awarded to the claimants for the death of Upendra Urav, aged about 22 years at the time of accident. 3 2. Appellants who are mother & father of deceased Upendra Urav filed an application under Section 166 of the Act of 1988 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for brevity “Claims Tribunal”) seeking compensation to the tune of Rs. 23,46,000/- pleading therein that on the date of accident, deceased Upendra, aged about 22 years, was sole bread earner of the family and on account of his untimely death in the accident, the appellants have suffered economical and psychological difficulties. 3. Learned Claims Tribunal, upon appreciation of pleadings and evidence placed on record by respective parties, held that deceased Upendra Urav died in the accident arising out of rash & negligent driving of the offending vehicle driven by respondent No.1, owned by respondent No.2 and insured by respondent No.3. Breach of conditions of insurance policy was not found to be proved and after calculating the amount of compensation, the learned Claims Tribunal awarded Rs. 14,10,320/- as total compensation along-with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of claim application. 4. Mr. A.L.Singroul, learned counsel for the appellants, would submit that the deceased was Mason (Rajmistri) and the learned Claims Tribunal has awarded very meager amount 4 while assessing income of deceased as Rs.8,600/- per month, which should be Rs. 9,310/- per month, as per Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the office of the Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh, as the deceased was semi-skilled labour. Therefore, the instant appeal be allowed and the amount of compensation awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal may be enhanced suitably. 5. Mr. Syed Afaque Hussain, learned counsel appearing for the respondents No.1 & 2 does not oppose the submission made by learned counsel for the appellants/claimants. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and gone through the records minutely. 7. Learned Claims Tribunal has assessed the monthly income of deceased Upendra Urav to be Rs. 8,600/- per month, however, in the opinion of this Court, as per the Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the office of Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh for the semi-skilled labour, the monthly income of the deceased should be Rs. 9,310/- per month, which comes to Rs.1,11,720/- per annum. 5 8. 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 1, Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Ors2 and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors 3 , this Court is computing the compensation as below:- Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court Income as per minimum wages Rs. 8,600 x 12 = Rs. 1,03,200/- Rs. 9,310 x 12 = Rs. 1,11,720/- Add future prospects @ 40% Rs. 1,03,200 + Rs. 41,280 = Rs. 1,44,480/- Rs. 1,11,720 + Rs. 44,688 = Rs. 1,56,408/- Deduction of 1/2 towards personal expenses Rs. 1,44,480 – 72,240 = 72,240/- Rs. 1,56,408 – 78,204 = Rs. 78,204/- Multiplier of 18 Rs. 72,240 x 18 = Rs. 13,00,320/- Rs. 78,204 x 18 = Rs. 14,07,672/- Loss of parental consortium Rs. 80,000/- Rs. 88,000/- Funeral expenses Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 16,500/- Loss of Estate Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 16,500/- Total Rs. 14,10,320/- Rs. 15,28,672/- 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 6 9. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs. 14,10,320/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 15,28,672/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs. 14,10,320/-, the appellants are entitled for an additional amount of Rs. 1,18,352/-. The insurance company/ respondent No.3 is directed to deposit the amount of compensation as enhanced by this Court within a period of 45 days. The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of claim application before the Tribunal till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. 10. Accordingly, this appeal is partly allowed and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Ashok