1 CGHC010269682026 2026:CGHC:30889 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1685 of 2026 1 - Smt. Anita Yadav W/o Late Ramesh Yadav Aged About 45 Years R/o Ward No. 03, Yadav Mohalla, Badi Koni, P.S. Koni, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 2 - Ku. Megha Yadav D/o Ramesh Yadav Aged About 18 Years R/o Ward No. 03, Yadav Mohalla, Badi Koni, P.S. Koni, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 3 - Ku. Purnima Yadav (Minor) D/o Ramesh Yadav Aged About 16 Years (Minors, Hence Represented Through Their Natural Guardian/ Mother Smt. Anita Yadav, Appellant No. 1) R/o Ward No. 03, Yadav Mohalla, Badi Koni, P.S. Koni, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 4 - Ku. Nandani Yadav (Minor) D/o Ramesh Yadav Aged About 12 Years (Minors, Hence Represented Through Their Natural Guardian/ Mother Smt. Anita Yadav, Appellant No. 1) R/o Ward No. 03, Yadav Mohalla, Badi Koni, P.S. Koni, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 5 - Khileshwar Yadav (Minor) S/o Ramesh Yadav Aged About 11 Years (Minors, Hence Represented Through Their Natural Guardian/ Mother Smt. Anita Yadav, Appellant No. 1) R/o Ward No. 03, Yadav Mohalla, Badi Koni, P.S. Koni, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Appellants versus 1 - Rahul Singh Thakur S/o Ramesh Singh Thakur Aged About 31 Years R/o Village Gatauri, Barpali Road, P.S. Koni, Dist- Bilaspur (C.G.) Driver 2 - Akash Verma S/o Late Makarchand Verma Aged About 34 Years R/o Ward No. 17, Near Bajrang Mandir, Village Jalso P.O. Semartal, P.S. Koni, District Bilaspur (C.G.) (Owner) Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2026.07.22 10:24:27 +0530 2 3 - Cholamandalam M.S. General Insurance Company Limited Through Branch Manager, Office- Vyapar Vihar, Main Road Near Vinayak Netralaya, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) (Insurer) 4 - Kumari Laxmi Yadav D/o Ramesh Yadav Aged About 21 Years R/o- Ward No. 03, Yadav Mohalla, Badi Koni, P.S. Koni, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 5 - Kumari Mansi Yadav D/o Ramesh Yadav Aged About 20 Years R/o- Ward No. 03, Yadav Mohalla, Badi Koni, P.S. Koni, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondents For Appellants : Mr. Mukul Chaturvedi, Advocate. For Respondents : Not noticed. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal, J. Order on Board (21.07.2026) 1. Heard on I.A. No. 01/2026, application for condonation of delay. 2. Upon due consideration and for the reasons mentioned in the application, I.A. No. 01/2026 is allowed and delay of 178 days in filing the instant appeal is condoned. 3. Also heard on admission. 4. This is the claimants’ appeal for enhancement against the award dated 14.10.2025 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur (C.G.) in Motor Accident claim case No. 1067/2022, whereby a compensation amount of Rs. 17,75,136/- has been awarded in favour of the claimants. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Tribunal erred in assessing the income of the deceased at Rs. 9,280/- per month by applying the minimum wages for an unskilled labourer for the year 2021. It is submitted that the deceased was unmarried and was working as a driver, earning Rs. 12,000/- to Rs. 13,000/- per month. Therefore, his income ought to have been assessed on the basis of wages for a skilled or semi-skilled labourer. It is further submitted that since the deceased was 3 unmarried but had more than 2 dependents, the applicable deduction towards personal expenses should have been 1/3rd. The Tribunal, however, erroneously applied 1/2nd deduction. On these grounds, it is prayed that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal be suitably enhanced. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant and perused the record of the Tribunal including award impugned. 7. After scrutinizing the evidence on record, the Tribunal held that the accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving of Motorcycle No. CG-10-BE-9101 by its driver, Rahul Singh Thakur, Respondent No.1, owned by Akash Verma, Respondent No.2 herein. The deceased, Ganesh Ram Yadav, who was riding Motorcycle No. CG-10-EP-1479, sustained grievous injuries in the said accident dated 20.12.2021 and succumbed to the injuries. The claimants contended that the deceased was working as a driver and earning Rs. 12,000/- to Rs. 13,000/- per month. However, they failed to produce any documentary evidence in support thereof. Therefore, the Tribunal, taking the age of the deceased as 25 years as per the Postmortem Report Ex.P-8, assessed the notional income of the deceased at Rs. 9,280/- per month, being the minimum wages for an unskilled labourer as on the date of accident i.e. 20.12.2021. Further, since the deceased was unmarried, a deduction of 1/2 towards personal and living expenses was applied, and the total compensation has been calculated as under:- Sl. No. Heads Compensation 01 Annual notional income of the deceased (9,280x12) =Rs.1,11,360/- 02 After adding 40% i.e. Rs. 44,544/- towards future prospect annual income of the deceased (Rs. 1,11,360+44,544) =Rs. 1,55,904/- 03 Loss of future income of the deceased after deduction of 1/2nd i.e. Rs. 77,952/- for personal expenses (Rs. =Rs. 77,952/- 4 1,55,904-77,952) 04 Total loss of dependency after applying multiplier of 18 (77952x18) =Rs. 14,03,136/- 05 Towards funeral expenses Rs.18,000/- 06 Towards loss of estate Rs. 18,000/- 07 Towards loss of love and affection to all claimants (48,000x7) Rs. 3,36,000/- Total Rs. 17,75,136/- 8. On a careful consideration of the material on record, it is apparent that no documentary evidence is available to hold that the deceased was a skilled or semi-skilled labourer; even the driving licence of the deceased has not been produced. As such, this Court finds that the Tribunal has properly appreciated the evidence and the compensation awarded is just and reasonable. There is no infirmity in the impugned award warranting interference. 9. Accordingly, the appeal of the appellant is hereby dismissed at the admission stage. Sd/- Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Judge H.L. Sahu