1 CGHC010088702024 2026:CGHC:29106 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 525 of 2024 1 - Raj Kumari Kurre W/o Brijlal Kurre Aged About 50 Years R/o Sant Kabir Das Ward No. 3, Gogaon, Police Station Gudhiyari, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Brijlal Kurre S/o Kartik Kurre Verma Aged About 56 Years R/o Sant Kabir Das Ward No. 3, Gogaon, Police Station Gudhiyari, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Ku. Tashika Kurre D/o Late Bhanupratap Kurre Aged About 2 Years Minor Through Legal Guardian Grand Mother Appellant No. 1, R/o Sant Kabir Das Ward No. 3, Gogaon, Police Station Gudhiyari, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Yogesh Kurre S/o Late Bhanupratap Kurre Aged About 4 Years Minor Through Legal Guardian Grand Mother Appellant No. 1, R/o Sant Kabir Das Ward No. 3, Gogaon, Police Station Gudhiyari, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellants versus 1 - Komalchand Sahu S/o Dhaniram Sahu Aged About 30 Years R/o Through Suresh Kumar Sahu, Bajrang Nagar, Gogaon, Near Kabir Kutti, Police Station Gudhiyari, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh (Owner Of Offending Vehicle Truck Bearing Registration No. C.G. 04-M L- 6014) 2 - Chola Mandlam M.S. General Insurance Company Limited Through Divisional Manager, Insurance Chola Mandlam M.S. BHOLA NATH KHATAI Digitally signed by BHOLA NATH KHATAI Date: 2026.07.14 12:22:22 +0530 2 General Insurance Company Limited Hinduja Complex, Paras Nagar, Chowk, Near Railway Line Devendra Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh (Insurer Of Offending Vehicle Truck Bearing Registration No. C.G. 04-M L- 6014) ... Respondent(s) For Appellants : Mr. S. P. Sahu, Advocate For Respondent No.1 : None For Respondent No.2 : Mr. Ghanshyam Patel, 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 29.08.2023 passed by 3rd Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur, District Raipur (CG) in Claim Case No.809/2019, whereby the Tribunal has awarded a total compensation of Rs.13,30,600/- 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 Bhanupratap Kurre in a motor vehicle accident. 2. The brief facts as pleaded before the Tribunal are that the deceased Bhanupratap Kurre was working as a driver with respondent No.1 Komalchand Sahu on Truck No. CG-04/ML/6014. On 07.07.2019 at about 3:00 AM, while driving the said truck under the instructions of respondent No.1 towards Dhamtari, near Manoj Dhaba, Jaisakara, Charama, the front left wheel of the truck suddenly burst. Due to this, the vehicle went out of control and hit a roadside tree, resulting in fatal injuries to the deceased and his on-the-spot death. It was submitted that prior to the 3 accident, the deceased had informed respondent No.1 about the defective condition of the wheels. However, respondent No.1 negligently postponed the repairs on one pretext or another. The accident occurred solely due to the negligence of respondent No.1 in failing to maintain the vehicle and the deceased had no negligence whatsoever. 3. The claimants pleaded that, at the time of the accident, deceased, Bhanupratap Kurre, was about 30 years of age, hale and healthy. He had completed higher technical education [ITI] and was working as a mechanic at Bhasin Automobiles, Telibandha, Raipur, and was earning Rs. 20,000/- per month. In addition to the above, he was also working as a driver on Truck No. CG-04/ML/6014 belonging to respondent No.1 and was earning Rs. 15,000/- per month from the said driving work. According to the claimants, who are the parents, son, and daughter of the deceased, they were entirely dependent upon his earnings. Owing to the untimely and accidental death of the deceased, the family suffered immense financial hardship and irreparable loss. On these averments, the claimants instituted a claim petition before the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal seeking compensation of Rs.66,90,000/- under various heads. 4. Upon appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence adduced by the parties, the Tribunal recorded a finding that the claimants had failed to produce any cogent and reliable evidence to establish either the occupation or the alleged monthly income of the deceased. Consequently, the Tribunal declined to accept the contention that the deceased was earning Rs.20,000/- per month as a mechanic with Bhasin Automobiles and an additional Rs.15,000/- per month as a driver employed by respondent 4 No.1. Hence, the Tribunal assessed the notional monthly income of the deceased at Rs.6,000/-. Considering the age of the deceased to be approximately 31 years, an addition of 40% towards future prospects was made. Deducting one- fourth of the assessed income towards 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.12,09,600/-. In addition thereto, a sum of Rs.16,500/- each was awarded towards loss of estate and funeral expenses, and a further sum of Rs.88,000/- was granted towards filial consortium and loss of love and affection. Thus, the Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.13,30,600/- together with interest at the rate of 9% 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.6,000/-, which, according to him, 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.2 – insurance company, opposes the 5 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. 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 deceased Bhanupratap Kurre was earning Rs.20,000/- per month as a mechanic with Bhasin Automobiles and an additional Rs.15,000/- per month as a driver employed by respondent No.1, no documentary evidence in this regard has been brought on record. The accident occurred on 07.07.2019 and the minimum wages of even an unskilled labour at that time was Rs.8400. Accordingly, the monthly income of the deceased is reassessed at Rs.8,400/-, resulting in an annual income of Rs.1,00,800/-. 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.1,41,120/- (100800 + 40320 ). 9. The deceased was approximately 31 years of age at the time of the accident. There are four claimants, i.e. the parents and two children of the deceased. Therefore, one-fourth of the annual income, i.e., Rs.35,280/-, is liable to be deducted towards the personal expenses of the deceased. After such deduction, the amount comes to Rs.1,05,840/-. 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 6 of 16, the total loss of dependency works out to Rs.16,93,440/- (Rs.1,05,840 × 16). So far as the compensation under 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) 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 four claimants, being the parents and children of the deceased, is entitled to parental/filial consortium at the rate of Rs.44,000/- each, aggregating to Rs.1,76,000/-. Accordingly, the compensation payable to the claimants is recomputed as under: Sl. No. Particulars Calculation 1. Total loss of dependency (applying multiplier of 16) 105840 x 16 16,93,440 2. Funeral Expenses 16500 3. Loss of estate 16500 4. Filial consortium and love & affection (44,000 to each of the 4 claimants) 176000 Total compensation Rs.19,02,440 10. Thus, the appellants/claimants are entitled to total compensation of Rs.19,02,440/- instead of Rs.13,30,600/- 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.5,71,840/- (19,02,440 - 13,30,600) 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 7 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 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