Page No.1 of 5 IN MAC-666-2022 2025:CGHC:59753 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 666 of 2022 [Arising out of award dt. 13.04.2022, passed in Claim Case No.82/2020 (Smt. Mamta and another v. Jitendra Kumar and others) by the Addl. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dhamtari (CG)] 1 - Smt. Mamta W/o Late Nirmal Das Manikpuri Aged About 32 Years R/o Ward No. 10 Mathura Nagar Magarlod Post And Atahsil Magarlod, District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh. 2 - Priya Manikpuri D/o Late Nirmal Das Manikpour Aged About 9 Years Minor Through Legal Guardian Mother Smt. Mamta W/o Late Nirmal Das Manikpuri, Ignorant Parent Smt. Mamta W/o Late Nirmal Das Manikpouri. R/o Ward No. 10 Mathura Nagar Magarlod Post And Atahsil Magarlod, District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh. ... Appellants Versus 1 - Jitendra Kumar S/o Deendayal Yadav Aged About 38 Years R/o Village Gadadih (Thekala) Thana Magarlod, District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh. 2 - Branch Manager, United India Insurance Company Limited Sinha Complex Bathena Chowk Dhamtari Tahsil And District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh. 3 - Deepak Das S/o Dinu Das Aged About 57 Years Caste Panika, R/o Palari, Tahsil Gurur, District Balod Chhattisgarh. 4 - Smt. Hemin Bai Manikpuri W/o Late Nirmaldas Manikpuri Aged About 50 Years Caste Panika, R/o Palari, Tahsil Gurur, District Balod Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents [Cause-title taken from Case Information System (CIS)] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Appellants : Mr. A.L. Singroul, Advocate For Respondent No.2 : Mr. Dashrath Gupta, Advocate SAIFAN KHAN Digitally signed by SAIFAN KHAN Page No.2 of 5 IN MAC-666-2022 For Respondent No.3-4 : Mr. Utkarsh Patel, Advocate ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Single Bench: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal (Order on Board) 09.12.2025 1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short the “Act of 1988”) has been preferred by the appellants/claimants seeking enhancement of amount of compensation, challenging the impugned award dt. 13.04.2022, passed in Claim Case No.82/2020 (Smt. Mamta and another v. Jitendra Kumar and others) by the Addl. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dhamtari (CG), whereby learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.13,67,565/- (wrongly calculated by the Claims Tribunal as Rs.13,67,501/-) as compensation for the death of Nirmal Das Manikpuri, who died in road accident on 25.01.2020. 2. 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. Claims Tribunal erred in assessing income of the deceased to be Rs.7,000/- per month which should be Rs.9,000/- as per Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the office of the Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh. Even, the learned Claims Tribunal has also erred in awarding only Rs.44,000/- on the head of loss of consortium to the dependents of the deceased, whereas it ought to have been Rs.44,000 x 4 = Rs.1,76,000/-. Further, the learned Claims Tribunal has also erred in deducting 1/3 amount Page No.3 of 5 IN MAC-666-2022 on the head of personal expense, which ought to have been 1/4 under the facts and circumstances of the present case. Therefore, the instant appeal be allowed and the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal may suitably be enhanced. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents 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. 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. Learned Claims Tribunal assessed the monthly income of deceased to be Rs.7,000/-, 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 deceased should be Rs.9,000/- PM (as per minimum wages prescribed at relevant time). Even, the learned Claims Tribunal has also erred in deducting 1/3 amount on the head of personal expense, which ought to have been 1/4. Further, the learned Claims Tribunal has also erred in awarding only Rs.44,000/- on the head of loss of consortium to the appellants, whereas it ought to have been Page No.4 of 5 IN MAC-666-2022 Rs.44,000 x 4 = Rs.1,76,000/-. Therefore, in the considered opinion of this Court, the amount of compensation awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal is liable to be enhanced. 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 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:- Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1. Income Rs.7,000 x 12 = Rs.84,000/- Rs.9,000 x 12 = Rs.1,08,000/- 2. Future Prospect (+) 40% (i.e. Rs.33,600/-) = Rs.1,17,600/- (+) 40% (i.e. Rs.43,200/-) = Rs.1,51,200/- 3. Deduction (-) 1/3 (i.e. Rs.39,200/-) = Rs.78,400/- (-) 1/4 (i.e. Rs.37,800/-) = Rs.1,13,400/- 4. Multiplier (x) 16 = Rs.12,54,400/- (x) 16 = Rs. Rs.18,14,400/- 5. Loss of Estate Rs.16,500/- Rs.16,500/- 6. Funeral Expenses Rs.16,500/- Rs.16,500/- 7. Loss of Consortium Rs.44,000/- Rs.44,000 x 4 = Rs.1,76,000/- 8. Medical expenses Rs.36,165/- Rs.36,165/- 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 Page No.5 of 5 IN MAC-666-2022 Total Rs.13,67,565/- (wrongly calculated by the Tribunal as Rs.13,67,501/-) Rs.20,59,565/- 7. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs.13,67,565/- (wrongly calculated by the Tribunal as Rs.13,67,501/-) is enhanced to Rs.20,59,565/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs.13,67,565 /-, the appellants are held entitled for an additional amount of Rs.6,92,000/-. The concerned respondents are directed to deposit the amount of compensation as enhanced by this Court within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of claim application before the Tribunal 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. 9. Consequently, in view of the above, the cross-objection filed on behalf of the respondents No.03 & 4 under Order 41 Rule 22 of CPC read with Rule 242(3) of the Chhattisgarh Motor Vehicles Rules, 1994 also stands disposed of. sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge s@if