1 CGHC010139832020 2026:CGHC:29896 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 821 of 2020 1 - Reeta Yadav Wife Of Late Nandkumar Aged About 33 Years Permanent Resident Of Village-Basantpur, Ward No. 15, Tahsil- Wadrafnagar, District-Balrampur Chhattisgarh, Business Address- Village Lolki, C/o Bigu Yadav, Tahsil-Pratapput, District-Surajpur Chhattisgarh., District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Prashant Kumar Yadav Son Of Late Nandkumar Yadav Aged About 12 Years Minor Represented Through Legal Guardian Mother Reeta Yadav Wife Of Late Nandkumar, Permanent Resident Of Village- Basantpur, Ward No. 15, Tahsil-Wadrafnagar, District-Balrampur Chhattisgarh, Business Address- Village Lolki, C/o Bigu Yadav, Tahsil- Pratapput, District-Surajpur Chhattisgarh., District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh --- Appellant(s) versus 1 - Gourishankar Yadav Son Of Gobind Yadav Aged About 26 Years Occupation-Driver, Resident Of Village Japla, Ward No. 15, Post And Police Station- Duddhi, Tahsil-Duddhi, District-Sonbhadra Uttar Pradesh., District : Sonbhadra, Uttar Pradesh 2 2 - Heeralal Yadav Son Of Ganesh Yadav Resident Of Kudwa, Post- Kon, Tahsil-Duddhi, District-Sonbhadra Uttar Pradesh., District : Sonbhadra, Uttar Pradesh 3 - Chola Mandalam Insurance Company Limited Branch Office- Second Floor, Second Floor, Simran Tower, Opposite-Lic Building, Vidhansabha Road, Pandri, Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) MAC No. 863 of 2020 1 - Reeta Yadav W/o Late Nandkumar Aged About 33 Years Permanent R/o Village- Basantpur, Ward No. 15, Tahsil- Wadrafnagar, District- Balrampur, (C.G.), Business Address- Village- Lolki, C/o Bigu Yadav, Tahsil- Pratappur, District- Surgajpur, (C.G.), Chhattisgarh ---Appellant(s) Versus 1 - Gourishankar Yadav S/o Gobind Yadav Aged About 26 Years Occupation-Driver, R/o Japla, Ward No. 15, Post And Police Station- Duddhi, Tahsil-Duddhi, District- Sonbhadra, (U.P.) (Vehicle Driver), District : Sonbhadra, Uttar Pradesh 2 - Heeralal Yadav S/o Ganesh Yadav R/o Kudwa, Post- Kon, Tahsil- Duddhi, District-- Sonbhadra (U.P.) (Vehicle Owner), District : Sonbhadra, Uttar Pradesh 3 - Chola Mandalam Insurance Company Limited Branch Officer- Second Floor, Simran Tower, Opposite- Lic Building, Vidhansabha Road, Pandri, Raipur, (C.G.), District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) 3 For Appellant(s) : Mr. Krishnakant Prajapati on behalf of Mr. D.N. Prajapati, Advocates For Respondent(s) No. 3 : Mr. Ghanshyam Patel, Advocate SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment On Board 15.07.2026 1. Since both of these appeals have arisen out of a common accident and since common question of law and fact are involved in both of these appeals, therefore, they have been clubbed together, heard together and are being decided by this common judgment. 2. MAC/821/2020 has been preferred by the appellants/claimants against the impugned award dated 28/02/2020 passed by learned Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Pratappur, District Surajpur in MACT No. 35/2019 whereby compensation of Rs. 7,90,000/- has been granted in favour of the appellants/claimants for the death of Nandkumar, aged about 38 years and MAC/863/2020 has been preferred by the appellants/claimants against the impugned award dated 28/02/2020 passed in MACT/36/2019 whereby compensation of Rs. 3,90,000/- has been granted in favour of the appellants/claimants for the death of Prabhat, aged about 14 years. Both the appeals have been filed by the appellants/claimants seeking enhancement of compensation. 4 3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants/claimants in both the cases would submit that in MAC/821/2020, the Claims Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased Nandkumar as Rs. 6,000/- per month which should have been Rs. 8,140/- as per the minimum wage notification prevailing at the time of the accident. Furthermore, Rs. 18,000/- each ought to have been granted for loss of estate and for funeral expenses and Rs. 48,000/- x 2 = Rs. 96,000/- ought to have been granted for loss of consortium. He would further submit that so far as MAC/863/2020 is concerned, the Claims Tribunal has also erred in assessing the notional income of the deceased Prabhat as Rs. 3,000/- per month which should be Rs. 8,140/- as per the minimum wage notification at the time of the accident. The Claims Tribunal has further erred in not granting any future prospect as it ought to have added 40% towards future prospect. Furthermore, Rs. 18,000/- each ought to have been granted for loss of estate and for funeral expenses and Rs. 48,000/- ought to have been granted for loss of consortium. As such, the amount of compensation as awarded by the Claims Tribunal may suitably be enhanced. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents would support the impugned award and submit that the amount of compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is just and proper and does not warrant any interference by this Court. 5 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection. MAC No. 821 of 2020 :- 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the record, it appears that the Claims Tribunal assessed the monthly income of the deceased as Rs. 6,000/- per month, however, in accordance with the minimum wage notification prevailing on the date of the accident, his monthly income should be Rs. 8,140/-. Furthermore, Rs. 18,000/- each ought to have been granted for loss of estate and for funeral expenses and Rs. 48,000/- x 2 = Rs. 96,000/- ought to have been granted for loss of consortium 7. Thus, this Court is computing the compensation as below:- Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1. Monthly Income Rs. 6,000/- Rs. 8,140/- 2. Future Prospect NIL (+) 40% i.e. Rs. 3,256/- = Rs. 11,396/- 3. Deduction (-) 1/3 i.e. Rs. 2,000/- = Rs. 4,000/- (-) 1/3 i.e. Rs. 3,798/- = Rs. 7,598/- 4. Yearly Income Rs. 4000/- x 12 = Rs. 48,000/- Rs. 7,598/- x 12 = Rs. 91,176/- 6 3. Multiplier (x) 15 = Rs. 7,20,000/- (x) 15 = Rs. 13,67,640/- 4. Loss of Estate Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 18,000/- 5. Funeral Expenses Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 18,000/- 6. Loss of Consortium Rs. 40,000/- Rs. 48,000/- x 2 = Rs. 96,000/- Total Rs. 7,90,000/- Rs. 14,99,640/- 8. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs. 7,90,000/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 14,99,640/-. Hence, the appellants are held entitled for an additional amount of Rs. 7,09,640/-. Respondent No. 3 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 @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of claim application before the Tribunal i.e. 01/05/2019 till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. MAC No. 863 of 2020 :- 9. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the record, it appears that the Claims Tribunal assessed the notional income of the deceased as Rs. 3,000/- per month, however, in accordance with the minimum wage notification prevailing on the date of the accident, his monthly income should be Rs. 8,140/-. Furthermore, Rs. 18,000/- each ought to have 7 been granted for loss of estate and for funeral expenses and Rs. 48,000/- ought to have been granted for loss of consortium 10. Thus, this Court is computing the compensation as below:- Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1. Monthly Income Rs. 3,000/- Rs. 8,140/- 2. Future Prospect NIL (+) 40% i.e. Rs. 3,256/- = Rs. 11,396/- 3. Deduction (-) 1/3 i.e. Rs. 1,000/- = Rs. 2,000/- (-) 1/2 = Rs. 5,698/- 4. Yearly Income Rs. 2000/- x 12 = Rs. 24,000/- Rs. 5,698/- x 12 = Rs. 68,376/- 3. Multiplier (x) 15 = Rs. 3,60,000/- (x) 15 = Rs. 10,25,640/- 4. Loss of Estate Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 18,000/- 5. Funeral Expenses Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 18,000/- 6. Loss of Consortium NIL Rs. 48,000/- Total Rs. 3,90,000/- Rs. 11,09,640/- 11. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs. 3,90,000/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 11,09,640/-. Hence, the appellants are held entitled for an additional amount of Rs. 7,19,640/-. Respondent No. 3 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 8 copy of this order. The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of claim application before the Tribunal i.e. 01/05/2019 till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. 12. Accordingly, both the appeals are allowed and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. Sd/-Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Harneet