1 2026:CGHC:5158 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M.A(C) No.1643 of 2023 1 - Indramani Rajwade Wd/o. Late Shivkumar Rajwade, Aged About 32 Years R/o. Village -Khopa, Post -Chungadi, Chowki - Karnji, Police Station -Bishrampur, District -Surajpur, Chhattisgarh. (Claimants) 2 - Ritu Rajwade, D/o. Late Shivkumar Rajwade, Aged About 14 Years (Minor Through Their Legal Guardian Appellant No.1) R/o. Village -Khopa, Post -Chungadi, Chowki -Karnji, Police Station -Bishrampur, District -Surajpur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Shubham Rajwade, S/o. Late Shivkumar Rajwade, Aged About 4 Years (Minor Through Their Legal Guardian Appellant No.1) R/o. Village -Khopa, Post -Chungadi, Chowki -Karnji, Police Station - Bishrampur, District -Surajpur, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellants versus 1 - Kamlesh Singh S/o. Late Ramsay Singh, Aged About 30 Years R/o. Village -Khopa, Post -Chungadi, Chowki -Karnji, Police Station -Bishrampur, District -Surajpur, Chhattisgarh. (Non Applicant No.1 / Driver Of Vehicle No. CG-15-DP-3313) SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Digitally signed by SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Date: 2026.01.31 17:21:16 +0530 2 2 - Dinesh Kumar Rajwade, S/o Prasottam Rajwade, Aged About 22 Years R/o. Village -Khopa, Post -Chungadi, Chowki -Karnji, Police Station -Bishrampur, District -Surajpur, Chhattisgarh. (Non Applicant No.2 / Owner Of Vehicle No. CG-15-DP-3313) 3 - Tata A.I.G. Insurance Co. Ltd. Registered Head Office - Peninshula, Business Park, Tower-A, 15th Floor, G.K. Road, Lower Parel, Mumbai, 400013, Through Branch Bilaspur Address: Office No. T-8, 4th Floor, Gwalani Chember, Vypar Vihar Main Road, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. (Non Applicant No.3 / Insurer Of Vehicle No. CG-15-DP-3313) ... Respondents For Appellants : Shri Akash Shrivastava, Advocates. For Respondent No.3. : Ms. Mansi Bansdev on behalf of Shri Sourabh Sharma, Advocates. Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment on Board 30.01.2026 1. With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally. 2. This Appeal has been preferred by the Appellants/Claimants seeking enhancement of compensation, assailing the award dated 05.07.2023 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Surajpur, District Surajpur (for short “the Tribunal”) in Claim Case No.65/2022, whereby the Tribunal has awarded a total compensation of Rs.12,46,000/- along with interest @ 6% per 3 annum on account of the death of Shiv Kumar Rajwade in a motor accident. 3. Learned Counsel for the Appellants submits that on 01.10.2021, the motor cycle of the deceased was dashed by offending motorcycle bearing registration No.CG-15-DP-3313 wherein, Shiv Kumar Rajwade sustained grievous injuries and died during treatment on 02.10.2021. He further submits that widow and two minor children of the deceased filed claim case under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act wherein, they pleaded that at the relevant time, age of the deceased was 36 years and his income was Rs.18,000/- per month as he was a Mason. He further submits that the Tribunal assessed his income at Rs.7,000/-, which is on lower side. He contends that with regard to income of the deceased, the Tribunal ought to have applied minimum wages matrix and the minimum wages admissible to an unskilled labourer in the month of October, 2021 was Rs.9,800/- and that figure ought to have been taken into account while computing the income part of the deceased. He further contends that the Tribunal has not granted filial consortium to Claimants/Appellants No.2 & 3 i.e. the minor children and prays for enhancement of compensation accordingly. 4. Contrastingly, learned Counsel for the Insurance Company opposes the submissions advanced by learned Counsel for the 4 Appellants and submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper. She contends that the Claimants failed to prove the income of the deceased and prays to dismiss the Appeal. 5. Heard learned Counsel for both the parties, perused the impugned award as also gone through the entire record with carefully 6. Admittedly, the claimants have not placed on record any documentary evidence to establish the exact monthly income of the deceased. The learned Tribunal assessed the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.7,000/-. However, for the month of October, 2021, the minimum wages payable to an unskilled labourer were Rs.9,800/- per month, which ought to have been taken into consideration for computation of income. Further, the learned Tribunal has not granted compensation towards filial consortium to the minor children. As held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors., reported in (2018) 18 SCC 130, the spouse and children of the deceased are entitled to compensation under the head of consortium. 7. In light of the aforesaid discussion, the compensation is re- computed as under: 5 S. No. Head of Compensation Awarded by Tribunal (Rs.) Re-assessed by this Court (Rs.) 1 Monthly Income 7,000 9,800 2 Annual Income 84,000 1,17,600 3 Future Prospects @ 40% 33,600 47,040 4 Total Annual Income 1,17,600 1,64,640 5 Deduction towards personal expenses (1/3) 39,200 54,880 6 Annual Dependency 78,400 1,09,760 7 Multiplier 15 15 8 Loss of Dependency 11,76,000 16,46,400 9 Spousal Consortium 40,000 40,000 10 Filial Consortium (2 minor children) — 80,000 11 Loss of Estate 15,000 15,000 12 Funeral Expenses 15,000 15,000 Total Compensation 12,46,000 17,96,400 8. Accordingly, the amount of compensation of Rs.12,46,000/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.17,96,400/-. Hence, the Appellants/Claimants shall be entitled to an additional amount of Rs.5,50,400/-. The Insurance Company is directed to make payment of the additional compensation assessed herein- above within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Rest of the terms of the award shall remain intact. 9. Accordingly, the Appeal is allowed in part and the impugned award is modified to the extent indicated herein-above. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE Priya