1 2026:CGHC:22866 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1620 of 2019 1 - Smt. Sumitra Bai W/o Late Vishwanath Markam Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Sirki, Post Office Chainpur Thana - Deepka, District Korba Chhattisgarh. Hall Mukam - Village And Post Mangla Thana - Civil Line, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Chhatram S/o Late Vishwanath Markam Aged About 21 Years R/o Village Sirki, Post Office Chainpur Thana - Deepka, District Korba Chhattisgarh. Hall Mukam - Village And Post Mangla Thana - Civil Line, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Manoj Kumar S/o Late Vishwanath Markam Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Sirki, Post Office Chainpur Thana - Deepka, District Korba Chhattisgarh. Hall Mukam - Village And Post Mangla Thana - Civil Line, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. (Claimants), District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ...Appellants 2 versus 1 - Teejram S/o Holiram Dhobi Aged About 39 Years R/o Quarter No. 11/3 Ambedkar Nagar S.E.C.L. Colony Bankimongra, Thana - Bankimogra, Tahsil Katghora, District Korba Chhattisgarh, (Driver Of The Offending Vehicle Haiwa Truck No. C.G. 12/c./2741). (Driver) 2 - M/s Ashish Enterprises Pro. Ashish Agrawal, Office Plot No. 106, 108 T.P. Nagar Korba, Tahsil And District Korba Chhattisgarh. (Resisted Owner Of The Offending Vehicle Haiwa Truck No. C.G. 12/c/2741). (Owner) 3 - Branch Manager The United India Insurance Company Limited, Through Branch Manager, Zonal Office 2nd Floor Gurukripa Tower Business Vyapar Bihar. In Front Of Amber Automobile Bilaspur, Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. (Insurer Of The Offending Vehicle Haiwa Truck No. C.G. 12/c. / 2741). (Insurer) ... Respondent(s) For Appellants : Mr. A.L. Singroul, Advocate For Respondent No. 3 : Mr. Pankaj Agrawal and Mrs. Swati Agrawal, Advocates SB - Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment on Board 3 14.05.2026 1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 has been preferred by the appellants/claimants seeking enhancement of compensation, challenging the impugned award dated 08/04/2019 (Annexure A/1) passed by learned 1st Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur in Claim Case No. 501/2017 whereby compensation of Rs. 7,13,014/- has been awarded in favour of the appellants/claimants for the death of Vishwanath Markam. 2. Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants would submit that the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is grossly inadequate and deserves to be enhanced as deceased was aged about 41 years at the time of the accident and as such, future prospect of 25% would be applicable as per the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in the matter of National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi and Anr.1, thus the amount of compensation may suitably be enhanced. 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 4 3. Learned counsel for respondent No. 3 would submit that the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is just and proper and does not warrant any interference by this Court and the Claims Tribunal has rightly granted 10% future prospect as according to the postmortem report, the age of the deceased was 50 years, therefore, the instant appeal is liable to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their submissions made herein-above and went through the record with utmost circumspection. 5. Admittedly, as per the claim application filed by the appellants/claimants, the date of birth of the deceased was 01/11/1972, which has also been proved by Manoj Kumar (A.W.-1), son of deceased Vishwanath Markam, and the accident occurred on 09/07/2013, therefore, on the date of the accident, the age of the deceased was 41 years and 9 months, as such, the Claims Tribunal has erred in relying upon the postmortem report (Ex. P/8) and holding the age of the deceased to be 50 years. Thus, in view of the decision rendered by the Supreme 5 Court in the matter of Pranay Sethi (supra), since the age of the deceased on the date of the accident was between 40-50 years, therefore, future prospect of 25% would be applicable. 6. In that view of the matter, this Court is computing the compensation as stated below :- Heads of Compensation Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court Monthly Income Rs. 5,385/- Rs. 6,000/- Future Prospect (+) 10% = Rs. 5,923/- (+) 25% = Rs. 7,500/- Total Income Rs. 5,923/- x 12 = Rs. 71,076/- Rs. 7,500/- x 12 = Rs. 90,000/- Deduction (-) 1/3 i.e. Rs. 23,692/- = Rs. 47,384/- (-) 1/3 i.e. Rs. 30,000 = Rs. 60,000/- Mutliplier (x) 13 = Rs. 6,15,992/- (x) 13 = Rs. 7,80,000/- Medical Expense Rs. 27,022/- Rs. 27,022/- Funeral Expenses Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 15,000/- Loss of Estate Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 15,000/- Loss of Consortium Rs. 40,000/- Rs. 40,000/- x 3 = Rs. 1,20,000/- Total Rs. 7,13,014/- Rs. 9,57,022/- 7. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs. 7,13,014/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 9,57,022/-. Hence, the appellants/claimants are held entitled for an additional 6 compensation of Rs. 2,44,008/-. Respondent No. 3/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the amount of compensation as enhanced by this Court within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of claim application before the Tribunal i.e. 04/09/2017 till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. 8. Accordingly, the impugned award is modified and the instant appeal is allowed to the extent indicated herein- above. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Harneet