1 2026:CGHC:8381 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1730 of 2023 1. Rishi Kumar Kant S/o Gajanand Prasad Aged About 47 Years R/o Village- Gataura, Thana And Tahsil Masturi, District- Bilaspur, C.G. 2. Nirmala W/o Rishi Kumar Kant Aged About 40 Years R/o Village- Gataura, Thana And Tahsil Masturi, District- Bilaspur, C.G. 3. Hairi Kant S/o Rishi Kumar Kant Aged About 21 Years R/o Village- Gataura, Thana And Tahsil Masturi, District- Bilaspur, C.G. 4. Gajanand Prasad Kant S/o Late Ranjan Kant Aged About 70 Years R/o Village- Gataura, Thana And Tahsil Masturi, District- Bilaspur, C.G. 5. Brij Bai W/o Gajanand Prasad Kant Aged About 65 Years R/o Village- Gataura, Thana And Tahsil Masturi, District- Bilaspur, C.G. ... Appellants versus 1. Manjur Ansari S/o Riyajuddin Ansari R/o Village- Tisar Tetuka, Thana- Meral District - Gadwa (Gharkhand) Present Address Coal Mines Gatauri Bilaspur, C.G. (Driver Of The Offiending Vehicle Trailer No. C.G. 04/m.N./3046). 2. Prachi Enterprises A-602, Dolphin Impress, Vidhan Sabha Road Raipur, District- Raipur, C.G. (Owner Of The Offiending Vehicle Trailer No. C.G. 04/m.N./3046). 3. The New India Insurance Company Limited Through Branch Manager, Office 3rd Floor, Rama Trader Center, In Front Of Rajiv Plaza Old Bus Stand Bilaspur, Thana- City Kotwali, Tahsil And District- Bilaspur, C.G. (Insurer Of The Offiending Vehicle Trailer No. C.G. 04/m.N./3046). ... Respondent(s) For Appellants/Claimants : Ms. Shaleeni Jangde, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. Arjun Lal Singroul, Advocate For Respondent No. 3/ : Mr. Mohd. Azad Siddiqui, Advocate Insurance Company Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 17.02 .2026 1. The claimants have filed this appeal for enhancement of compensation SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Digitally signed by SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Date: 2026.02.18 10:41:54 +0530 2 assailing the judgment and award passed by the learned 4th Motor Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur passed in Claim Case No. 184/2022 dated 12.04.2023 on account of death of Frendi Kant. 2. Ms. Shaleeni Jangde would submit that deceased met with an accident on 13.01.2022 and succumbed to death. The parents, siblings and grand parents filed claim case under Section 166 of Motor Vehicle Act, wherein, they pleaded that at the time of accident age of the deceased was 19 years and earning Rs. 15,000/-. She would contend that the learned Tribunal assessed income of the deceased Rs. 8,060/-, which is not in consonance with the minimum wage matrix. She would pray to enhance the compensation. 3. On the other hand, Mr. Mohd. Azad Siddiqui would submit that the claimants failed to prove income of the deceased by leading cogent evidence and the learned Tribunal has granted just and proper compensation. Thus, the appeal deserves to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. The claimants pleaded that income of the deceased at the time of accident was Rs. 15,000/- per month, but they failed to lead evidence. In absence of evidence, the learned Tribunal should have applied minimum wage matrix. The minimum wage admissible to an unskilled labourer in the month of January, 2022 was Rs. 9,540/- and the learned Tribunal should have taken that amount while computing the income. On other heads, the learned Tribunal has granted just and proper compensation. Thus, the compensation requires reconsideration and same is being revisited herein- below :- Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded by Tribunal Compensation awarded by this 3 Court 1. Income Rs. 8,060 x12 = Rs. 96,720/- Rs. 9,540 x12 = Rs. 1,14,480/- 2. Future Prospect (40%) = Rs. 38,688/- (40%) = Rs. 45,792/- 3. Deduction (-) 1/2 Rs. 67,704/- Rs. 67,704/- (-) 1/2 Rs. 80,136/- Rs. 80,136/- 4. Multiplier (x) 18 = Rs. 12,18,672/- (x) 18 = Rs. 14,42,448/- 5. Loss of Estate Rs. 16,500/- Rs. 16,500/- 6. Funeral expenses Rs. 16,500/- Rs. 16,500/- 7. Loss of consortium (for appellant No. 1) Rs. 44,000/- Rs. 44,000/- 8. Loss of consortium(for appellant No. 2) Rs. 44,000/- Rs. 44,000/- 9. Loss of consortium(for appellant No. 3) Rs. 44,000/- Rs. 44,000/- 10. Loss of consortium(for appellant No. 4) Rs. 44,000/- Rs. 44,000/- 11. Loss of consortium(for appellant No. 5) Rs. 44,000/- Rs. 44,000/- TOTAL Rs. 14,71,672/- Rs. 16,95,448/- 6. For the forgoing reasons, the appeal is allowed in part. The amount of compensation of Rs. 14,71,672/- awarded by the tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 16,95,448/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs. 14,71,672/-, the appellants/claimants are held entitled for an additional amount of Rs. 2,23,776/-. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the amount of compensation as enhanced by this Court within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The 4 appellants shall not be entitled to receive any interest for the period of delay caused in filing this appeal. Rest of the conditions of impugned award shall remain intact. 7.Accordingly, the instant appeal is hereby partly allowed. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge $iddhant