1 2026:CGHC:26153 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1163 of 2024 1 - Smt. Subhadra Baghel W/o Late Somaru Baghel Aged About 32 Years Resident Of Chhindikholkha, Para, Village Dashapal, Sargipal, Police Chowki Bakawand, P.S. Nagarnar District Bastar, Chhattisgarh (Claimants) 2 - Bhagat Baghel S/o Late Jhitaru Baghel Aged About 56 Years Resident Of Chhindikholkha Para, Village Dashapal, Sargipal, Police Chowki Bakawand, P.S. Nagarnar, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh ... Appellants versus 1 - Chaitu Kashyap S/o Aayatu Kashyap Aged About 56 Years Occupation Driver Vehicle, Resident Of Chikal Kadmadi, Bakawand, Through Lallan Jha, Son Of Umakant Jha, Resident Of Village Sargipal, Bakawand, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh 2 - Lallan Jha S/o Umakant Jha Resident Of Village Sargipal, Bakawand, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh 3 - The Oriental Insurance Company, Laxman Avenue Balaji Ward Jagdalpur Policy No. 192001 / 31 / 2019 / 535 Valuation From 26-04-2018 To 25-04-2018 ... Respondent(s) For Appellants : Mr. Sunder Lal Sahu, Advocate For Respondent No.3 : Mr. Akash Shrivastava, Advocate BHOLA NATH KHATAI Digitally signed by BHOLA NATH KHATAI Date: 2026.06.29 11:36:11 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 25/06/2026 1. The present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has been preferred by the appellants/claimants assailing the award dated 11.02.2022 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bastar place Jagdalpur (CG) in Claim Case No.34/2020, whereby the Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.16,94,128/- along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of application till its realization, in favour of the appellants/claimants, on account of the death of Somaru Baghel in a motor vehicle accident. 2. The admitted facts are that respondent No.1 is the driver, respondent No.2 is the owner of the offending vehicle i.e., Mamta Travels Bus bearing Registration No. CG-17-F-0239, and respondent No.3 is the insurer of the said vehicle. 3. The case of the claimants before the Tribunal, in short, was that on 10.03.2019 at about 1:50 PM, deceased Somaru Baghel was returning to his house from village Karanji on his Discover motorcycle. When he reached the Main Road of village Muli, the offending bus, driven rashly and negligently by respondent No.1, dashed the motorcycle. Somaru Baghel sustained grievous injuries and was 3 admitted to CHC Bakawand where he succumbed to the injuries. Crime No. 53/2019 under Section 304-A IPC was registered at P.S. Nagarnar on the report lodged at Police Outpost Bakawand. 4. It was pleaded that the deceased was aged about 29 years at the time of accident and was engaged in the work of contractorship, masonry and tile fitting and was earning Rs.15,000/- per month. The claimants, being the wife and father of the deceased, were wholly dependent on his income. The deceased was issueless and his mother had predeceased him. Due to the casual death of Somaru Baghel, there is an irreparable loss to the appellant/claimants. Accordingly, the claimants preferred an application before the Tribunal claiming total compensation of Rs.20,40,000/-. 5. The Tribunal, after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence on record, held that the claimants failed to prove that the deceased was a skilled worker or contractor. Treating the deceased as an unskilled labourer, the Tribunal assessed his income at Rs.8,320/- per month as per Notification No. 8/Minimum Wages/Labour Commissioner/2019/1723 dated 08.03.2019 issued by the Labour Commissioner, Govt. of Chhattisgarh for unskilled workers. The Tribunal computed the compensation as under: 4 Sl. No. Head of Compensation Calculation / Basis Amount 1. Notional Annual Income Rs. 8,320/- × 12 months 99,840/- 2. Addition for Future Prospects 40% of Rs. 99,840/- 39,936/- 3. Gross Annual Income Sum of (1) and (2) 1,39,776/- 4. Deduction for Personal Expenses 1/3rd of Gross Annual Income 46,592/- 5 Annual Loss of Dependency 1,39,776 - 46,592 93,184/- 6. Total Loss of Dependency Rs. 93,184/- × Multiplier of 17 15,84,128/- 7. Funeral Expenses 15,000/- 8. Loss of Estate 15,000/- 9. Loss of Spousal Consortium Awarded to Claimant No. 1 40,000/- 10. Loss of Filial Consortium Rs. 20,000/- each to Claimant Nos. 1 & 2 40,000/- Total Awarded Compensation Rs.16,94,128/- 6. Accordingly, the Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs. 16,94,128/- along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application till its realization, in favour of the claimants, against which the instant appeal has been preferred by the claimants seeking enhancement of the compensation. 7. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the Tribunal has grossly erred in assessing the income of the deceased on the lower side. It is submitted that the 5 deceased was a skilled mason and contractor and was earning Rs.15,000/- per month, however, the Tribunal has erroneously treated the deceased as an unskilled labourer and assessed his income at Rs.8,320/- per month on the basis of minimum wages. He further submits that the Tribunal has awarded less compensation under other heads. Thus, counsel for the appellants prayed that the appeal be allowed and the compensation awarded by the Tribunal be enhanced suitably. 8. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.3 - Insurance Company submits that in the facts and circumstances of case, the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is just and proper and requires no further enhancement. 9. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 10. 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. 11. Now this Court shall examine as to whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper 6 compensation in the given facts and circumstances of the case. 12. From perusal of the record it is evident that although the claimants have stated that the deceased was earning Rs.15,000/- per month from the work of contractorship, masonry and tile fitting, they failed to produce any documentary evidence to prove the said income. In absence of cogent proof of income, the Tribunal has rightly resorted to the minimum wages notified by the State for an unskilled worker, which were Rs.8,320/- per month on the date of accident. The deceased was aged about 29 years. Therefore, addition of 40% towards future prospects is in accordance with the Constitution Bench judgment in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi (2017) 16 SCC 680. Deduction of 1/3rd towards personal expenses and application of multiplier of 17 are also as per the principles laid down in Sarla Verma v. DTC (2009) 6 SCC 121 and Pranay Sethi (supra). The amounts awarded under conventional heads i.e., loss of estate, funeral expenses and consortium are in conformity with Pranay Sethi (supra) and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram (2018) 18 SCC 130. Hence, the total compensation of Rs.16,94,128/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable and does not warrant any interference. 7 13. In view of the aforesaid, this Court does not find any illegality, perversity or error in the impugned award dated 11.02.2022 passed in Claim Case No.34/2020. 14. Accordingly, the appeal being devoid of merit is hereby dismissed, affirming the impugned award passed by the Tribunal. 15. No order as to costs. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) JUDGE Khatai