1 2025:CGHC:60633 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 2227 of 2024 1 - Sukman Kashyap S/o Late Bondku Kashyap Aged About 34 Years R/o Village Narayanpal, Post Lohandiguda, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh ---- Claimant) 2 - Budhuram Kashyap S/o Late Bondku Kashyap Aged About 32 Years R/o Village Narayanpal, Post Lohandiguda, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh ----- (Claimant) ... Appellants Versus 1 - Ramnath Baghel S/o Late Hidma Baghel Aged About 23 Years R/o Pipalawand, P.S. Bhanpuri District Bastar, Chhattisgarh --(Driver Cum Owner) 2 - Branch Manager, The New India Insurance Company Limited, Nayapara Court Chowk, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh ----(Insurer) ... Respondents For Appellants/Claimants : Mr. Abhishek Nirala, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. P.K. Tulsyan, Advocate For Respondent No. 2/ Insurance Company For Respondent No. 1 : : Ms. Dashrath Gupta, Advocate None, though served Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment on Board 12/12/2025 Heard. 1. Admit. 2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the appeal is heard finally. 3. The appellants/claimants have filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act for enhancement of compensation assailing the Digitally signed by RAMESH KUMAR VATTI Date: 2025.12.15 10:57:13 +0530 2 award passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bastar, place Jagdalpur (C.G.) in Claim Case No. 11/2024 dated 20.09.2024, whereby the learned Claims Tribunal has passed an award to the tune of Rs.9,41,200/- with interest @ 9% per annum on account of death of Bondku Kashyap. 4. Facts of the case, in brief, are that on 06.09.2023 at about 19:30 pm, while deceased Bondku Kashyap was walking on the corner side of road, when he reached Nakapara Chowk, at that time, respondent No. 1/rider-cum-owner of Motorcycle bearing registration No. CG-17 / KU- 9489 by ridding it in a rash and negligent manner, dashed the deceased- Bondku Kashyap, resultantly, he sustained injuries and died during the course of his treatment in the hospital. 5. Mr. Abhishek Nirala, learned counsel appearing for the appellants/claimants would argue that on 06.09.2023 at about 19:30 pm, the rider of the offending motorbike bearing registration No. CG-17 / KU-9489 by ridding it rashly and negligently, dashed the deceased, resultantly, the deceased sustained injuries and died during the course of his treatment in the hospital. He would submit that the claim application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act was filed by 02 major sons of the deceased, inter alia, on the ground that at the time of accident, the age of the deceased was 53 years, earning Rs.15,000/- per month and they claimed a sum of the Rs.20,00,000/-. He would further submit that the learned Claims Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased Rs.9.000/- per month as he was a Labour which is at lower side. He would contend that in absence of evidence, the learned Claims Tribunal should have applied the minimum wages matrix prevailing on the date of accident. He would further contend that 3 the learned Claims Tribunal has awarded compensation for loss of consortium to the claimants at Rs.20,000/- each which is at lower side. He would pray to enhance the compensation accordingly. 6. On the other hand, Mr. Dashrath Gupta, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 2/Insurance Company would oppose. He would submit that the claimants have failed to prove the income of the deceased. He would contend that the learned Claims Tribunal has awarded just and proper compensation, therefore, the appeal filed by the appellants/claimants deserves to be dismissed. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the learned Claims Tribunal with utmost circumspection. 8. The appellants/claimants pleaded that the deceased was a Labour and earning Rs.15,000/- per month, but they failed to adduce documentary evidence to prove this fact, therefore, the learned Claims Tribunal rightly treated the deceased an unskilled labourer and the finding recorded by the learned Claims Tribunal in this regard appears to be proper. The learned Claims Tribunal assessed the monthly notional income of the deceased Rs.9,000/- which appears to be at lower side. The learned Claims Tribunal should have applied the minimum wages matrix prevailing of the date of accident. The minimum wages admissible to an unskilled labour in the month of September, 2023 was Rs.9,960/- and the learned Claims Tribunal should have taken that figure into account while computing the income of the deceased. The learned Claims Tribunal further committed error by granting compensation for loss consortium to the claimants at Rs.20,000/- each which is also at lower side, therefore, they are entitled to get 4 Rs.40,000/- each for loss consortium. Accordingly, the compensation requires reconsideration. 9. Taking into consideration the aforesaid discussion and in light of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in the matter of National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi, reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors., reported in (2018) 18 SCC 130, this Court is computing the compensation and same is being revisited herein below:- Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1. Income as per minimum wages Rs.9,000/- per month Rs.9,960/- 2. Future prospect 10% Rs.900/- + Rs.9,000/- = Rs.9,900/- Rs.996/- + Rs.9,960/- = Rs.10,956/- 3. Deduction of 1/3rd towards personal expenses Rs.9,900 – Rs.3,300= Rs.6,600/- per month Rs.10,956 – 3,652 = Rs.7,304/- per month 4. Per month Income of the deceased Rs.6,600/- Rs.7,304/- 5. Annual Income of the deceased Rs.6,600/- x 12 = Rs.79,200/- per annum Rs.7,304 x 12 = Rs.87,648/- per annum 6. Multiplier of 11 Rs.79,200/- x 11 = Rs.8,71,200/- Rs.87,648/- x 11 = Rs.9,64,128/- 7. Loss of consortium to claimants Rs.40,000/- Rs.80,000/- 8. Funeral Expenses Rs.15,000/- Rs.15,000/- 9. Loss of Estate Rs. 15,000/- Rs.15,000/- Total : Rs.9,41,200/- Rs.10,74,128/- 10. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs.9,41,200/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to 5 Rs.10,74,128/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs.9,41,200/-, the appellants/claimants are held entitled for an additional amount of Rs.1,32,928/-. The concerned respondent No.2/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the amount of compensation as enhanced by this Court within a period of 03 months from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 9% per annum from date of filing of claim application before the Tribunal till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. 11. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part with modification in the impugned award to the above extent. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge vatti