1 CGHC010319632025 2026:CGHC:30593 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1617 of 2025 1 - Vidyawati @ Vidhyawati W/o Late Aditya Kumar Patel Aged About 34 Years (Wife Of Deceased), R/o Village- Karamdiha, Tehsil- Wadraf Nagar, Distt.- Balrampur (C.G.) 2 - Niranjan Patel S/o Late Aditya Kumar Patel Aged About 17 Years (Son Of Deceased), Minor Through Natural Guardian Mother Appellant No. 1, R/o Village- Karamdiha, Tehsil- Wadraf Nagar, Distt.- Balrampur (C.G.) 3 - Raunak Patel S/o Late Aditya Kumar Patel Aged About 11 Years (Son Of Deceased), Minor Through Natural Guardian Mother Appellant No. 1, R/o Village- Karamdiha, Tehsil- Wadraf Nagar, Distt.- Balrampur (C.G.) ... Appellants versus 1 - Dhan Singh S/o Jayram Aged About 35 Years (Driver Of Vehicle), R/o Karamdhari Bachara, Tehsil- Duddhi, Distt.- Sonbhadra (U.P.) 2 - M/s Shukla Enterprises (Owner Of Vehicle) Through Its Proprietor Ashutosh Shukla R/o Village- Bilouri Ramgarh, Panuganj, Distt.- Sonbhadra (U.P.) 3 - The New India Assurance (Wrongly Mentioned As Insurance) Company Ltd. (Insurance Company) Divisional Office- Branch Complex, Transport Nagar, Distt.- Korba (C.G.) Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2026.07.21 10:29:29 +0530 2 4 - Subhash Chandra Patel S/o Ramsagar Aged About 54 Years (Father Of Deceased), R/o Village- Karamdiha, Tehsil- Wadraf Nagar, Distt.- Balrampur (C.G.) 5 - Champa Devi W/o Subhash Chandra Patel Aged About 51 Years (Mother Of Deceased), R/o Village- Karamdiha, Tehsil- Wadraf Nagar, Distt.- Balrampur (C.G.) --- Respondents For Appellants/Claimants : Mr. Sanjay Patel, Advocate. For Respondent No. 3 : Mr. Anil Gulati, Advocate. For Other respondents : None. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Judgment on Board (20.07.2026) 1. Heard on I.A. No. 01/2025, application for condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. 2. Learned counsel for respondent No. 3 opposes the same. 3. Upon due consideration and for the reasons mentioned in the application, I.A. No. 01/2025 is allowed and the delay of 167 days in filing the appeal is condoned. 4. Also heard on admission. 5. Admit. 6. The matter is heard finally. 7. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short the "Act of 1988") has been preferred by the appellants/claimants seeking enhancement of the amount of compensation, challenging the impugned award dated 07.11.2024, passed in M.A.C. No.60/2023, whereby the learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.17,02,800/- as compensation for the death of Late Aditya Kumar Patel, who died in a road accident which took place on 10.05.2023. 3 8. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the learned Claims Tribunal has erred in awarding a lesser amount of compensation in the facts of the case. The Claims Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased as 8,000/- per month, whereas the deceased was working as a driver and was earning Rs. 15,000/- per month; therefore, considering the deceased as a skilled labourer, the income of the deceased should be considered on the higher side. The Tribunal has also awarded a lesser amount under other conventional heads, which need to be enhanced. Therefore, the instant appeal should be allowed, and the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal may suitably be enhanced. 9. Learned counsel for respondent No.3/insurance company would submit that the Claims Tribunal after appreciating oral and documentary evidence available on record rightly awarded the compensation amount. Hence, the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is just and proper and requires no interference. 10.I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection. 11.In the case at hand, the learned Tribunal has indeed taken the monthly income of the deceased to be Rs. 8,000. According to the appellant Vidyawati (AW-1), the deceased used to earn Rs. 15,000/- per month as a driver, but no documents have been produced in support of this fact, yet no challenge has been raised by the non-appellants to the deceased being a Bolero driver, hence considering the deceased working as a driver/skilled labourer, it would safe to take his monthly income of Rs.11,390/- as per the Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the 4 office of Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh for skilled labour. Furthermore, in other conventional heads the Tribunal has granted only Rs.90,000/- which ought to be Rs.2,76,000/-, to that extent the impugned award needs to be modified. 12.Thus, in light of the aforesaid discussion and 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 & Ors3, this Court is computing the compensation as below:- Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1 Income Rs. 8000 x 12 = 96,000/- Rs. 11390 x 12 = 1,36,680/- 2. Future prospect (+)40% (i.e. Rs. 38400) = 1,34,400/- (+)40% (i.e. Rs. 54672) = 1,91,352/- 3. Deduction (-) 1/4 (i.e.33600) = 100800/- (-) 1/4 (i.e. 47838) = 1,43,514/- 4. Multiplier (x) 16 = 16,12,800/- (x) 16 = 22,96,224/- 5 Other convention al heads Rs. 90,000/- Rs. 2,76,000/- (18000+18000+240 000) Total Rs. 17,02,800/- Rs. 25,72,224/- 13. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs.17,02,800/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.25,72,224/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs.17,02,800/-, the appellants 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 5 are held entitled for an additional amount of Rs.8,69,424/-. The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application before the Claims Tribunal till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. 14. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. 15. The Registry is directed to communicate the claimants in writing “the enhanced amount” in this appeal as against the award made by the concerned 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 resides. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge H.L. Sahu