1 2026:CGHC:2723 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 81 of 2024 1. Sumitra Yadav W/o Late Nanhku Yadav Aged About 46 Years R/o Village Shivpur, Police Chowki Vijaynagar, Police Station Ramanujganj, Tahsil Ramchandrapur, District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. 2. Ramdhyan Yadav S/o Late Nanhku Yadav Aged About 29 Years R/o Village Shivpur, Police Chowki Vijaynagar, Police Station Ramanujganj, Tahsil Ramchandrapur, District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. 3. Sanjay Yadav S/o Late Nanhku Yadav Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Shivpur, Police Chowki Vijaynagar, Police Station Ramanujganj, Tahsil Ramchandrapur, District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. 4. Dhananjay Yadav S/o Late Nanhku Yadav Aged About 16 Years Through The Legal Guardian And Mother No. 01 Sumitra Yadav Wife Of Late Nanhku Yadav, R/o Village Shivpur, Police Chowki Vijaynagar, Police Station Ramanujganj, Tahsil Ramchandrapur, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. 5. Durgavati Yadav D/o Late Nanhku Yadav Aged About 28 Years W/o Vijay Yadav, Occupation House Wife, R/o Village Dharmi (Parsa Khandpara), Police Station Ramchandrapur, Tahsil Ramanujganj, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. 6. Mangari Yadav D/o Late Nanhku Yadav Aged About 27 Years W/o Santosh Yadav, Occupation House Wife, R/o Village Minwakhand, Police Station Sanawal, Tahsil Ramchandrapur, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. 7. Panpati Yadav D/o Late Nanhku Yadav Aged About 23 Years W/o Stendra Yadav, Occupation House Wife, R/o Village Jhanjhatpara, Namnakala Nagar Ambikapur, Police Station And Tahsil- Ambikapur, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh Digitally signed by AJINKYA PANSARE Date: 2026.01.19 15:13:10 +0530 2 8. Manmati Yadav D/o Nanhku Yadav Aged About 25 Years W/o Mohan Yadav, Occupation House Wife, R/o Village Putsura, Police Station And Tahsil Balrampur, District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant(s) versus 1. Alam Ansari S/o Samsuddin Ansari Aged About 42 Years Occupation Driver, R/o Ward No. 03 Jailpara Ramanujganj, Police Station And Tahsil Ramanujganj, District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. (Driver Of Offending Vehicle C G - 30, B-2375) 2. Irfan S/o Kalamuddin Ansari Aged About 32 Years Occupation Former, R/o Village- Kalikapur (Jogni Tola), Police Station And Tahsil Ramchandrapur, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. (Owner Of Offending Vehicle C G - 30, B-2375) 3. Mandal Manager National Insurance Company Limited, Mandal Office Plant No. 768, First Floor, Kosabadi, Niharika Road Korba, District Korba, Chhattisgarh. (Insurer Of Offending Vehicle C G - 30, B-2375) ... Respondent(s) For Appellants : Mr. Dinesh Yadav, Advocate For Respondent No. 1&2 : Mr. Hariom Rai, Advocate For Respondent No. 3 : None, though served Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment On Board 16.1.2026 1) This is an admitted appeal. 2) With the consent of parties, matter is heard finally. 3) This appeal has been preferred by the appellants/ claimants under Section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 assailing the award passed by learned Second Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) in 3 Claim Case No. 10/2023 dated 11.10.2023 whereby learned Tribunal has passed an award to the tune of Rs. 12,57,880/- with interest @ 7% on account of death of Nanhaku Yadav. 4) Facts of the present case are that on 30.8.2022 at about 5:00 pm, Nanhaku Yadav was returning home after grazing the cattle and when he reached Shivpur Mod, the offending vehicle – Splendor motorcycle dashed him. In the accident, Nanhaku Yadav sustained grievous injuries and died during the course of treatment. Claimants who are widow and children of the deceased moved claim application claiming therein compensation to the tune of Rs. 27,50,000/-. They pleaded that the deceased was aged 46 and used to earn Rs. 15,000/- per month running a dairy. Learned Tribunal framed issues ; parties led evidence and thereafter award impugned was passed. 5) Learned counsel for the appellants submits that learned Tribunal has considered the deceased to be an unskilled laborer overlooking the fact that he used to run a dairy and assessed the notional income of the deceased to be Rs. 7,800/- per month which is not in consonance with the minimum wage matrix applicable in the State of Chhattisgarh at the relevant time. He further submits that learned Tribunal has awarded meager sum towards loss of consortium without considering the number of dependents. He contends that learned Tribunal also erred in deducting 1/4th dependency towards personal expenses of the 4 deceased whereas number of dependents were eight and appropriate deduction should have been 1/5. He prays to modify the award accordingly. 6) On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that learned Tribunal has awarded just and proper compensation and this appeal deserves to be dismissed. 7) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 8) Perusal of the record would indicate that claimants pleaded that the deceased used to run a dairy earning Rs. 15,000/- per month. Sanjay Yadav (AW/1) repeated the contents of claim application. Pushpendra Yadav (AW/2) proved that he was an eye-witness to the accident and accident occurred due to negligence on the part of rider of motorcycle. Insurance Company could not lead evidence to prove the contrary. 9) With regard to income, claimants failed to produce any documentary evidence and learned Tribunal assessed the income of deceased to be Rs. 7,800/- per month whereas according to the minimum wage matrix applicable in the State of Chhattisgarh, minimum wages payable to a skilled laborer in August, 2022 was Rs. 10,060/- per month and learned Tribunal ought to have taken this figure into account while calculating the income. 10) Also, learned Tribunal erred in law in deducting 1/4th dependency 5 towards personal and living expenses of the deceased whereas number of claimants were eight and according to the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Sarla Verma & Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Others1, appropriate deduction should be 1/5 for more than six dependents. 11) Furthermore, learned Tribunal has not awarded separate compensation towards loss of consortium to the claimants No. 5 to 8 who are married daughters of the deceased. Recently, Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Seema Rani and Others Versus Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. and Others2 held that major, married, and earning children are "legal representatives" and have a right to apply for compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act and there is no reason to exclude a married daughter from receiving compensation. 12) Thus, in light of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is re- computing the compensation as below: Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded by Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1. Annual Income Rs. 93,600/- (@ Rs. 7,800/- pm) Rs. 1,20,720/- (@ Rs. 10,060/- pm) 2. Annual Income adding Future Prospect Rs. 1,17,000/- (@25%) Rs. 1,50,900/- (@25%) 3. Annual income after Deduction towards Rs. 87,750/- (@1/4) Rs. 1,20,720/- (@1/5) 1. (2009) 6 SCC 121 2. 2025 SCC OnLine SC 283 6 personal expenses 4. Annual Income after applying Multiplier Rs. 11,40,750/- (@13) Rs. 15,59,360/- (@13) 5. Loss of Estate Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 15,000/- 6. Funeral expenses Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 15,000/- 7. Loss of Consortium Rs. 80,000/- (Rs. 40,000/- to widow and Rs. 40,000/- to three children) Rs. 3,20,000/- (eight claimants) 8. Medical bills Rs. 7,130/- Rs. 7,130/- TOTAL Rs. 12,57,880/- Rs. 19,26,490/- 13) Accordingly, the amount of compensation of Rs. 12,57,880/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 19,26,490/-. Hence, the appellants are entitled for an additional amount of Rs. 6,68,610/-. The Insurance Company is directed to make payment of additional compensation assessed herein-above within period of 60 days. Rest of the terms of the award shall remain intact. 14) Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE A j i n k y a