1 2026:CGHC:23029 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 871 of 2023 1 - Ravindra Patel S/o Ajit Patel Aged About 40 Years R/o Gram Post Bhukel, Thana/tehsil Basna, District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh 2 - Smt. Tilotama, W/o Ravindra Patel Aged About 37 Years R/o At Gram Post Bhukel, Thana/tehsil - Basna, District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh ... Appellants/Claimants versus 1 - Tayyub Hussain S/o Mohd. Hussain, Aged About 54 Years R/o Gram Post Bhukel, Thana/tehsil Basna District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh (Owner and Driver) 2 - United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Through Regional Manager United India Insurance Co. Ltd., R/o Krishna Complex Kacheri Chowk Raipur, Tehsil/district Raipur Chhattisgarh (Insurer) --- Respondent(s) (Cause-titles are taken from CIS) For Claimants : Mr. Suraj Patel, Adv. On behalf of Mr. Shobhit Mishra, Adv. For Insurance Company : Ms. Swati Agrawal, Adv. On behalf of Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, Adv. For Owner and Driver : None Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Judgment on Board (14.05.2026) 1. The gist of the claim before the Tribunal, in brief, was that SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2026.05.18 13:02:41 +0530 2 on 28.05.2021, Khirod Patel was returning by his tractor to his home after cultivating his field at that time, the driver of Toofan vehicle bearing Registration No. CG-06-GH-2536, drove the vehicle at a very high speed and in a rash and negligent manner and hit the tractor, due to which the tractor overturned and Khirod Patel died. On the report of the incident being lodged at Police Station Basna, Crime was registered. 2. It it claimed that at the time of accident, deceased Khirod Patel was aged about 19 years and was unmarried. He was a mason and earning Rs.15,000/- per month. Due to the casual death of Khirod, there is an irreparable loss to the appellants/claimants who are the mother and father of the deceased. Therefore, the claimants had preferred an application before the Tribunal claiming total compensation of Rs. 19,50,000/-. 3. The learned Tribunal, after considering the evidence and documents available on record, assessed the income of the deceased to be Rs.6,000/- per month. Added 40% future prospects. Considered the age of the deceased as 19 years and the fact that the claimants are the mother and father of the deceased, 1/2 of the income was deducted towards personal expenses. Considered the fact that the deceased was aged about 19 years, multiplier of 18 was applied. Further, a total amount of Rs.1,21,000/- has been awarded under other heads. Accordingly, the total compensation of Rs.10,28,200/- has been awarded by the Claims Tribunal in favour of the claimants with interest @ 9% per annum against respondents, from the date of application and in default of payment of compensation 12% rate of interest shall be applied till its realization. Hence, the appeal is for enhancement. 3 4. Learned counsel for the appellant/claimants submits that the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is on the lower side and needs to be enhanced suitably. Learned counsel for appellants urged that the Tribunal has assessed lesser income of the deceased which needs to be enhanced suitably. Therefore, the appeal may be allowed and needs to be enhanced suitably. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Insurance Company has argued that the Claims Tribunal after appreciating oral and documentary evidence available on record rightly awarded the compensation amount. Hence, the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is just and proper and requires no interference. 6. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 7. In a motor accident claim case, what is important is that, the compensation to be awarded by the Courts/Tribunals should be just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the case. It should neither be a meager amount of compensation, nor a Bonanza. 8. Now this Court shall examine as to whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the given facts and circumstances of the case. 9. As regards the income of the deceased, though the claimants have pleaded that the deceased was earning Rs.15,000/-. per month from the work of Mason, but no documentary evidence in support thereof has been produced, but it cannot be said that the deceased was not earning anything from his work. Therefore, in absence of any reliable evidence regarding income of the deceased, 4 keeping in mind the nature of occupation, date of accident, wage structure prevailing on the date of accident, price index and cost of living etc. specially notification by Labour Department for minimum wages, upon considering the aforementioned factors, I find it appropriate to take income of deceased as Rs. 9,200/- per month as minimum wages, at the relevant time of accident i.e. 28.05.2021. The annual income comes to Rs. 1,10,400/-. As per National Insurance Company Ltd., Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others, (2017) 16 SCC 680, future prospects would be 40% as rightly held by the Tribunal. Hence, after adding 40% towards future prospect i.e. Rs.44,160/-, the yearly income comes to Rs.1,54,560/-. 10.The deceased was unmarried person aged around 19 years and the claimants are the mother and father (total 2 persons) of the deceased, so deduction towards personal expenses would be ½ as rightly held by the Tribunal i.e. Rs. 77,280/-. After deduction of the same, the annual dependency comes to Rs.77,280/-. Since the deceased was unmarried and aged around 19 years, in view of judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma (Smt.) and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121 and National Insurance Company Ltd., Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others, (2017) 16 SCC 680, the multiplier would be 18 as rightly held by the Tribunal. Hence, after applying multiplier of 18, the total loss of dependency works out to Rs. 13,91,040/-. The Claims Tribunal has awarded Rs.16,500 towards towards loss of estate, Rs. 16,500/- towards funeral expenses with 10% increase and Rs. 44,000/-, 44,000 towards love and affection which is just and proper and required no intereference. Therefore, the claimants would become 5 entitled for total compensation of Rs.15,12,040/-. Thus, the claimants are entitled for compensation in the following manner:- Heads Calculation Compensation towards dependency Rs. 13,91,040/- Towards loss of estate Rs. 16,500/- Towards loss of love and affection to two claimants @ Rs. 44,000/- each Rs.88,000/- Funeral expenses Rs. 16,500/- Total Rs. 15,12,040/- 11. Thus, the total compensation is recomputed as Rs. 15,12,040/-. After deducting Rs. 10,28,200/- as awarded by the Tribunal, the enhancement would be Rs. 4,83,840/- (1512040- 1028200). 12. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. The appellants/claimants shall be entitled to get Rs.4,83,840/- in addition to what has already been awarded by the Claims Tribunal. The enhanced amount shall carry interest @ 6% from the date of enhancement of the award till its realization. The rest of the conditions shall remain intact. 13. The Registry is directed to communicate the claimants in writing “the enhanced amount” in this appeal as against the award made by the Tribunal below. The said communication be made in Hindi Deonagri language and the help of paralegal workers may be availed with a co- ordination of Secretary, Legal Aid of the concerned area wherein the claimants resides. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge -Shubham