1 2026:CGHC:4633 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 789 of 2021 1 - Prakash Chand Yadav S/o Sitaram Yadav Aged About 46 Years R/o Village Post Darripara, Police Station And Tahsil Bhaiyathan, District - Surajpur (C.G.) 2 - Smt. Sundri Bai W/o Prakash Chand Yadav Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Post Darripara, Police Station And Tahsil Bhaiythan, District - Surajpur (C.G.) 3 - Vikash Kumar Yadav S/o Prakash Chand Yadav Aged About 15 Years R/o Village Post Darripara, Police Station And Tahsil Bhaiythan, District - Surajpur (C.G.) 4 - Ku. Poonam Yadav D/o Prakash Chand Yadav, Aged About 13 Years R/o Village Post Darripara, Police Station And Tahsil Bhaiythan, District - Surajpur (C.G.) 5 - Sitaram S/o Late Netai Yadav Aged About 73 Years R/o Village Post Darripara, Police Station And Tahsil Bhaiythan, District - Surajpur (C.G.) 6 - Saguni Bai W/o Sitaram Aged About 70 Years R/o Village Post Darripara, Police Station And Tahsil Bhaiythan, District - Surajpur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Khelsay S/o Late Kheduram Aged About 40 Years R/o Girwarganj, Police Station Surajpur, District - Sarajpur (C.G.) 2 - Rajesh Sahu S/o Bechan Lal Sahu Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Dhamarpara (Odgi), Pos Chhinddand, Tahsil Baikunthpur, District - Koriya (C.G.) 3 - Iffco Tokyo General Insurance Company Limited Through Manager, Registered Office, Ifco Sadan C-1, District Center Saket, New Delhi 110017, Branch Office, Baikunthpur, District Koriya (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) NIRMALA RAO 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Appellants : Shri Anil Gulati, Advocate. For Respondent No.3 : Shri P.R. Patankar, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 28.01.2026 1. The appellants/ claimants have filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act seeking enhancement of compensation against the award dated 27.8.2021, passed in Claim Case No.115 of 2019 by the learned Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Surajpur, District Surajpur whereby the learned Tribunal passed an award to the tune of Rs.8,77,000/- and directed the Insurance Company to make payment alongwith interest @ 9% per annum on account of death of Vijay Kumar Yadav. 2. Learned counsel for the appellants would submit that on 12.4.2019 at about 9:00 pm, Vijay Kumar Yadav and his friend Surjeet Kushwaha were going to Kudargad Trust. When they stopped the vehicle to attend the call of nature, the driver of a Bolero bearing registration No.C.G.16-B-1892 by driving it rashly and negligently, dashed the motorcycle from the back side, resultantly, Vijay Kumar Yadav and Surjeet Kushwaha sustained injuries and subsequently succumbed to death. He would contend that the parents, minor siblings and grand parents filed a claim case under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act wherein they pleaded that at the time of accident, the age of the deceased was 23 years and earning Rs.20,000/- per month. He would submit that the learned Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.5,000/- per month, which is at lower side. He would 3 contend that in absence of evidence with regard to income of the deceased, the learned Tribunal should have applied the minimum wages matrix. He would contend that the minimum wages admissible to an unskilled labourer in the month of April, 2019 was Rs.8,400/-. He would fairly submit that under other conventional heads, the learned Tribunal has granted just and proper compensation. He would pray to enhance the compensation accordingly. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent No.3 would oppose the submissions made by counsel for the appellants. He would contend that the Tribunal has granted just and proper compensation. He would further submit that the claimants failed to prove the income of the deceased by leading cogent evidence. He would submit that the appeal deserves to be dismissed. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents present on the record with utmost circumspection. 5. Admittedly, the claimants could not lead evidence to prove the fact that the deceased was earning Rs.20,000/- per month. In absence of sufficient evidence, the learned Tribunal should have applied the minimum wages matrix. The minimum wages admissible to an unskilled labourer in the month of April, 2019 was Rs.8,400/- and the Tribunal should have taken that figure while computing the income of the deceased. Under conventional heads, the learned Tribunal has granted just and proper compensation. 6. Taking into consideration the above-discussed facts, the compensation requires recomputation, and the same is revisited herein below: Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded by Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 4 1. Income Rs. 5,000 x 12 = Rs. 60,000/- Rs. 8,400 x 12 = Rs. 1,00,800/- 2. Future Prospect 40% - 24,000/- (60,000 + 24,000 = 84,000/-) 40% - 40,320/- (1,00,800 + 40,320 = 1,41,120/-) 3. Deduction (-) 50% (42,000/-) (84,000 – 42,000 = 42,000/- (-) 50% (70,560/-) (Rs.1,41,120-70,560) = Rs. 70,560/- 4. Multiplier (x) 18 = Rs. (42,000 x 18 = 7,56,000/-) (x) 18 = Rs. (70,560 x 18 = 12,70,080/-) 5. Loss of Estate Rs. 16,500/- Rs. 16,500/- 6. Funeral expenses Rs. 16,500/- Rs. 16,500/- 7. Loss of Consortium Rs. 44,000 x 2 = 88,000/- Rs. 44,000 x 2 = 88,000/- TOTAL Rs. 8,77,000/- Rs. 13,91,080/- 7. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs.8,77,000/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.13,91,080/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs.8,77,000/-, the appellants/claimants are entitled for an additional amount of Rs.5,14,080/-. The 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 @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of claim application before the Tribunal till its realization. 8. Accordingly, this appeal is partly allowed and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nimmi