1 2026:CGHC:27231 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1716 of 2019 1 - Sawan Kumar S/o Kusu Gond Aged About 35 Years Caste Raj Gond, R/o Village Chorbhatthi, Police Station And Tahsil Patharia, District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh., District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh 2 - Vishal Kumar S/o Sawan Kumar Aged About 14 Years Through Father Sawan Kumar Son Of Kusu Gond, R/o Village Chorbhatthi, Police Station And Tahsil Patharia, District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh., District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh 3 - Arun Kumar S/o Sawan Kumar Aged About 12 Years Through Father Sawan Kumar Son Of Kusu Gond, R/o Village Chorbhatthi, Police Station And Tahsil Patharia, District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh., District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh 4 - Ku. Asha D/o Sawan Kumar Aged About 10 Years Through Father Sawan Kumar Son Of Kusu Gond, R/o Village Chorbhatthi, Police Station And Tahsil Patharia, District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh., District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh ... Applicants Versus 1 - Shiv Kumar Dhruwvanshi S/o Gopal Prasad Dhruwvanshi Aged About 39 Years R/o Old Bus Stand, Takhatpur, Police Station And Tahsil Takhatpur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. (Driver Of Vehicle Bus No. C.G.-10-G-0782), District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Sirish Naidu S/o B.K. Naidu (Keshav Naidu) Aged About 45 Years At Present R/o Nirala Nagar (Hemu Nagar), Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh, Permanent Address New Shanti Kunj, Link Road, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. (Owner Of Vehicle Bus No. C.G.-10-G- 0782), District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Shriram General Insurance Company Limited First Floor, Gurukripa Complex, I.C.I. Bank, Vyapar Vihar, Road, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. (Insurer Of Vehicle Bus No. C.G.-10-G-0782), District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents [Cause-title taken from Case Information System (CIS)] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ SAIFAN KHAN Digitally signed by SAIFAN KHAN 2 For Claimants : Mr. CR Sahu, Advocate For Insurance Company : Mr. Utsav Mahisvar, Advocate ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Single Bench: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal (Order on Board) 02.07.2026 1. This appeal has been filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short the “Act of 1988”) by the Claimant seeking enhancement of amount of compensation, challenging the impugned award dt. 13.05.2016, whereby learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.4,89,000/- as compensation for the death of Kevtin Bai, who died in a road accident took place on 07.09.2012. 2. Learned counsel for the Claimant would submit that learned Claims Tribunal has erred in awarding less amount of compensation in the facts of the case. Claims Tribunal erred in assessing income of deceased as Rs.3000/- per month which should be Rs.4498/- as per Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the office of the Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh. Further, Claims Tribunal also erred in not calculating any amount under the head of future prospect which ought to have been granted @ 40% of his income. Even, on other heads also less amount has been awarded. Therefore, to that extent, the instant appeal be allowed and the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal may suitably be enhanced. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents would submit that the appellants have failed to prove nature of occupation and income of the deceased by producing clinching and admissible piece of evidence, hence, the Tribunal is justified in assessing income of deceased on 3 notional basis. The amount of compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is just and proper which does not call for any interference. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection. 5. In the case at hand, in light of the judgments of the Supreme Court rendered in the matters of National Insurance Company Ltd. V. Pranay Sethi1, Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Ors2 and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors 3 , this Court is computing the quantum of compensation to be awarded to the claimant, as below:- Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1. Income Rs.3000/- x 12 = Rs.36,000/- Rs.4498/- x 12 = Rs.53,976/- 2 Future Prospect NIL (+) 40% (i.e. Rs.21,590/-) = Rs.75,566/- 3. Deduction (-) 1/4 (i.e. Rs.9000/-) = Rs. 27,000/- (-) 1/4 (i.e. Rs.18,891/-) = Rs.56,674/- 4. Multiplier (x) 17 = Rs.4,59,000/- (x) 17 = Rs.9,63,466/- 5. Other heads Rs.30,000/- Rs.40,000/- Total Rs.4,89,000/- Rs.10,03,466/- 6. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 4 Rs.4,89,000/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.10,03,466/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs.4,89,000/-, the appellants are held entitled for an additional amount of Rs.5,14,466/-. The concerned respondent is directed to deposit the amount of compensation as enhanced by this Court within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of claim application before the Tribunal till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. 7. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge s@if