1 CGHC010365472022 2026:CGHC:28937 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1279 of 2022 1 - Sukul S/o Late Dalgar, Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Shivnagar, Harrapara, Outpost Tara, Police Station Premnagar, District - Surajpur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Jugmen W/o Sukul, Aged About 48 Years R/o Village Shivnagar, Harrapara, Outpost Tara, Police Station Premnagar, District - Surajpur Chhattisgarh. 3 - Anita Wd/o Late Thakur Singh, Aged About 29 Years R/o Village Shivnagar, Harrapara, Outpost Tara, Police Station Premnagar, District - Surajpur Chhattisgarh. 4 - Ramesh S/o Late Thakur Singh, Aged About 7 Years Minor, Through Natural Guardian Mother Appellant No.3 Anita, R/o Village Shivnagar, Harrapara, Outpost Tara, Police Station Premnagar, District - Surajpur Chhattisgarh. 5 - Umesh S/o Late Thakur Singh, Aged About 5 Years Minor, Through Natural Guardian Mother Appellant No.3 Anita, R/o Village Shivnagar, Harrapara, Outpost Tara, Police Station Premnagar, District - Surajpur Chhattisgarh. 6 - Sumesh Kumar S/o Late Thakur Singh, Aged About 3 Years Minor, Through Natural Guardian Mother Appellant No.3 Anita, R/o Village Shivnagar, Harrapara, Outpost Tara, Police Station Premnagar, District - Surajpur Chhattisgarh. ... Appellants versus BHOLA NATH KHATAI Digitally signed by BHOLA NATH KHATAI Date: 2026.07.14 12:22:25 +0530 2 1 - Jyot Singh S/o Subaran Ram Kanwar, Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Sargawa, Police Station Udaypur, District Surguja (C.G.), Presently Residing At Village Shivnagar, Outpost Tara, Police Station Premnagar, District - Surajpur Chhattisgarh. (Driver Of Offending Vehicle) 2 - Dinesh Das S/o Amar Das, Aged About 42 Years R/o Village Sargawa, Police Station Udaypur, District Surguja (C.G.), Presently Residing At Village Shivnagar, Outpost Tara, Police Station Premnagar, District - Surajpur Chhattisgarh. (Owner Of Offending Vehicle) 3 - Bhartiya Axa General Insurance Company Limited, Through Branch Office, 2nd Floor, Near Jeet Tower, Nearby Rajkumar College, G.E. Road, Raipur, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh. (Insurer Of Offending Vehicle) ... Respondent(s) For Appellants : Mr. Anil Gulati, Advocate For Respondent No.3 : Mr. S. R. S. Amin, Advocate, with Ms. Gunjan Rani Agrawal, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board 10 / 07 / 2026 1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has been filed by the claimants/appellants assailing the award dated 27.07.2022 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Surajapur, District Surajpur (CG) in Motor Accident Claim Case No.57/2020, whereby the Tribunal has awarded a total compensation of Rs.14,81,200/- along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of application till its realization, in favour of the appellants/claimants, on account of the death of Thakur Singh in a motor vehicle accident. 3 2. The brief facts as pleaded before the Tribunal are that on 04.03.2020 at about 6:30 PM, the deceased Thakur Singh had parked his school bus and was returning home as a pillion rider on the motorcycle bearing No. CG-15-DQ-0121 belonging to Respondent No.1 Jyot Singh. At that time, respondent No.1 was driving the said motorcycle in a rash and negligent manner at high speed and caused the accident. Due to the said accident, the deceased Thakur Singh, who was sitting as a pillion rider, sustained grievous injuries and during treatment at Udaipur Hospital, he succumbed to the injuries. 3. The claimants pleaded that, at the time of the accident, the deceased was aged about 30 years and working as a Khalasi of a school bus in Adani Company and was earning Rs. 9,000/- per month, from which he was maintaining the claimants. Due to the sudden death of the deceased in the said accident, the claimants who are the parents, wife and children of the deceased have become destitute and are facing financial hardship. Hence, the claimants instituted a claim petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal seeking compensation of Rs.37,10,000/- under various heads. 4. Upon appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence adduced by the parties, the Tribunal recorded a finding that the claimants have failed to produce any cogent and reliable evidence to establish that at the time of accident the deceased was earning Rs.9,000/- per month as claimed. Hence, the Tribunal assessed the notional monthly income of the deceased at Rs.7,000/-. Considering the age of the deceased to be approximately 33 years, an addition of 40% towards future prospects was made. Deducting one- 4 fourth of the assessed income towards the personal expenses of the deceased, having regard to the number of dependants, and applying the multiplier of 16, the Tribunal computed the loss of dependency at Rs.14,11,200/-. In addition thereto, a sum of Rs.15,000/- each was awarded towards loss of estate and funeral expenses, and a further sum of Rs.40,000/- was granted towards spousal consortium. Thus, the Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.14,81,200/- together with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition until its realization. Aggrieved by the quantum of compensation so awarded, the present appeal has been preferred seeking enhancement thereof. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants/claimants submits that the Tribunal has committed a manifest error in assessing the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.7,000/-, which is even lower than the minimum wages payable to an unskilled labourer at the relevant time. It is contended that the income so assessed is requires suitable enhancement. It is further submitted that the compensation awarded under the conventional heads is also inadequate and deserves to be enhanced in accordance with the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. On these grounds, it is prayed that the impugned award be modified by enhancing the compensation. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3 – insurance company, opposes the submission made by the counsel for appellants and 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. 5 7. Heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the entire record with due care. 8. Though it was claimed that at the time of accident the deceased was working as a Khalasi of a school bus in Adani Company and was earning Rs.9,000/- per month, no documentary evidence in this regard has been brought on record. The accident occurred on 04.03.2020 and the minimum wages of even an unskilled labour at that time was Rs.8600. Accordingly, the monthly income of the deceased is reassessed at Rs.8,600/-, resulting in an annual income of Rs.1,03,200/-. As per National Insurance Company Ltd., Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others, (2017) 16 SCC 680, an addition of 40% towards future prospects is required to be made, as has been rightly held by the Tribunal. Thus, the amount comes to Rs.1,44,480/- (1,03,200 + 41280). 9. The deceased was approximately 33 years of age at the time of the accident. There are six claimants, i.e. the parents, wife and three sons of the deceased. Therefore, one-fourth of the annual income, i.e., Rs.36,120/-, is liable to be deducted towards the personal expenses of the deceased. After such deduction, the amount comes to Rs.1,08,360/-. In view of judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt.) and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121 and Pranay Sethi (supra), by applying multiplier of 16, the total loss of dependency works out to Rs.17,33,760/- (Rs.1,08,360 × 16). So far as the compensation under the conventional heads is concerned, in view of the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram, (2018) 6 18 SCC 130 and United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Satinder Kaur, (2021) 11 SCC 780, the claimants are entitled to Rs.16,500/- each towards loss of estate and funeral expenses. Further, each of the six claimants, being the parents, wife and children of the deceased, is entitled to spousal/parental/filial consortium at the rate of Rs.44,000/- each, aggregating to Rs.2,64,000/-. Accordingly, the compensation payable to the claimants is recomputed as under: Sl. No. Particulars Calculation 1. Total loss of dependency (applying multiplier of 16) 108360 x 16 17,33,760 2. Funeral Expenses 16500 3. Loss of estate 16500 4. Spousal/parental/filial consortium (44,000 to each of the 6 claimants) 264000 Total compensation Rs.20,30,760 10. Thus, the appellants/claimants are entitled to total compensation of Rs.20,30,760/- instead of Rs.14,81,200/- as awarded by the Tribunal. 11. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. The appellants/claimants shall be entitled for the enhanced compensation of Rs.5,49,560/- ( 20,30,760 - 14,81,200) in addition to what is already awarded by the claims Tribunal. The enhanced amount shall also carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till its realization. Accordingly, the impugned award stands modified to the above extent and rest of the conditions shall remain intact. 12. The Registry is directed to communicate the claimants in 7 writing “the enhanced amount” in this appeal as against the award made by the Claims Tribunal. 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 reside. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Khatai