1 CGHC010314122019 2026:CGHC:28437 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1736 of 2019 1 - Smt. Soniya Das W/o Late Ramsai Das Aged About 25 Years Caste Manikpuri, R/o Vanchanpara, Village Shivnandanpur, Tahsil Surajpur, P.S. Vishrampur District Surajpur Chhattisgarh, District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Suraj Das S/o Late Ramsai Das Aged About 2 Years Caste Manikpuri, (Since Minor) Through The Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Soniya Das, W/o Late Ramsai Das, Aged About 25 Years, Caste Manikpuri, R/o Vanchanpara, Village Shivnandanpur, Tahsil Surajpur, P.S. Vishrampur District Surajpur Chhattisgarh.........Claimants 3 - Jagmohan Das S/o Late Jakhu Das Aged About 45 Years Caste Manikpuri, R/o Vanchanpara, Village Shivnandanpur, Tahsil Surajpur, P.S. Vishrampur District Surajpur Chhattisgarh.........Claimants ... Appellant(s) versus 1 - Branch Manager Bajaj Alliance General Insurance Company Ltd. 8th, Floor Mahavir Tower Church Complex Main Road Ranchi Jharkhand..........Insurer 2 - Vijay Ram S/o Shri Keshwar Ram Caste Chamar, Sangbariya, P. O. Meraal, District Gadhwa Jharkhand........(Driver And Owner) ... Respondent(s) 2 For Appellants : Ms. Durga Mehar on behalf of Mr. Shakti Raj Sinha, Advocates For Respondent No. 1 : Ms. Jasleen Gulati on behalf of Mr. D.L. Dewangan, Advocates SB - Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order on Board 09.07.2026 1. The instant appeal has been preferred by the appellants/claimants against the impugned award dated 30/03/2019 passed by learned 2nd Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Surajpur in Claim Case No. 36/2016 seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal for the death of Ramsai Das. 2. Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants would submit that the Claims Tribunal has taken the monthly income of the deceased as Rs. 4,500/- whereas it ought to be Rs. 5,787/- as per the minimum wage notification prevailing on the date of the accident. Further the Tribunal has granted Rs. 15,000/- each for funeral expenses and for loss of estate which should be Rs. 18,000/- each and Rs. 40,000/- granted for loss of consortium should be Rs. 48,000/-, as such, the amount of compensation may suitably be enhanced. 3. Learned counsel for respondent No. 1/Insurance Company would support the impugned award and submit that the 3 compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is just and proper and does not warrant any interference by this Court. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the record with utmost circumspection. 5. A careful perusal of the impugned award would show that the Claims Tribunal has taken the monthly income of the deceased as Rs. 4,500/- whereas it ought to be Rs. 5,787/- as per the minimum wage notification and Rs. 18,000/- each ought to be granted for loss of estate and for funeral expenses and Rs. 48,000/- ought to be granted for loss of consortium. 6. In view of the aforesaid, compensation is calculated below :- Heads of Compensation Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court Income Rs. 4,500/- x 12 = Rs. 54,000/- Rs. 5,787/- x 12 = Rs. 69,444/- Future Prospect (+) 40% = Rs. 75,600/- (+) 40 % i.e. Rs. 27,777/- = Rs. 97,221/- Personal Expenses (-) 1/3 = Rs. 50,400/- (-) ¼ = Rs. 65,139/- Multiplier (x) 17 = Rs. 8,56,800/- (x) 17 = Rs. 11,07,363/- Loss of Estate Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 18,000/- Funeral Expenses Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 18,000/- Loss of Consortium Rs. 40,000/- Rs. 48,000/- Total Rs. 9,26,800/- Rs. 11,91,363/- 4 7. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs. 9,26,800/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 11,91,363/-. Hence, the appellants are held entitled for an additional compensation of Rs. 2,64,563/-. Respondent No. 1 is directed to deposit the amount of compensation as enhanced by this Court within a period of 2 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 i.e. 22/02/2016 till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. 8. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Harneet