1 CGHC010284862024 2026:CGHC:31794 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1685 of 2024 1 - Smt. Aasha Devi W/o. Late Jethmal Solanki Aged About 58 Years R/o. Vivekanand Ward Mungeli, Tahsil And District - Mungeli (C.G.) (Claimant) 2 - Rakesh Kumar Solanki S/o. Late Jethmal Solanki Aged About 38 Years R/o. Vivekanand Ward Mungeli, Tahsil And District - Mungeli (C.G.) (Claimant) ... Appellants versus 1 - Suraj Singh S/o. Ram Lochan Singh Rajput Aged About 20 Years (Driver Of Royal Infield Bullet Motor Cycle No. Cg-28-L-9902) 2 - Manohar Singh S/o. Malkhan Singh Rajput Aged About 45 Years R/o. Village - Roharra Khurd, Mahamai Para, Tahsil And District - Mungeli (C.G.) (Owner Of Royal Infield Bullet Motor Cycle Cg-28-L- 9902) 3 - Chola Mandalam M.S. General Insurance Company Limited Branch Office - Guru Govind Singh Ward, 2nd Floor, Simran Tower, Pandri Road, Raipur (C.G.) (Insurer Of Royal Infield Bullet Motor Cycle Cg-28-L-9902) --- Respondent(s) For Appellants : Ms. A.L. Singroul, Advocate For Respondents No.1 & 2 : None For Respondents No.3 : Mr. Prashant Sahu, Advocate SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2026.07.25 14:29:11 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Judgment on Board (24.07.2026) 1. 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 06.03.2024, passed in Claim Case No.28/2021, whereby the learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.2,03,000/- as compensation for the death of Jethmal Solanki who was aged about 65 years and died in a road accident which took place on 22.01.2021. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the learned Claims Tribunal has erred in awarding lesser amount of compensation in the facts of the case. The Claims Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased on the lower side and has also awarded lesser amount under other conventional heads, which needs to be enhanced. The Claims Tribunal has also made deductions as 1/2 in place of 1/3. Therefore, the instant appeal be allowed and the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal may suitably be enhanced. 3. 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. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection. 3 5. In this case, the Claims Tribunal has found that there was a breach of the insurance policy conditions as, at the time of accident, Respondent No.1 Suraj Singh was not having a valid and effective driving license. Therefore, the Tribunal fastened the liability upon Respondent Nos. 1 and 2, but also passed an order of 'pay and recover'. 6. In the case at hand, true it is that the learned Tribunal has taken the monthly income of the deceased to be Rs.3,000/-, which ought to be Rs.8,960/- as per the Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the office of Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh. In other conventional heads, the Tribunal has granted only Rs.77,000 which ought to be 1,21,000/- Furthermore, in place of 1/3, the Tribunal has made deductions as 1/2, to that extent the impugned award needs to be modified. 7. 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. 3000 x 12 = 36,000/- Rs. 8960 x 12 = 1,07,520/- 2. Future prospect NA (as the age of the deceased was 65 years at the NA (as the age of the deceased was 65 years at the time 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 4 time of accident) of accident) 3. Deduction (-) 1/2 (i.e. 18000) = 18,000/- (-) 1/3 (i.e. 35840) = 71,680/- 4. Multiplier (x) 7 = 1,26,000/- (x) 7 = 5,01,760/- 5 Other conventional heads Rs. 77,000/- Rs. 1,21,000/- (16500+16500+880 00) Total Rs. 2,03,000/- Rs. 6,22,760/- 8. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs.2,03,000/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.6,22,760/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs.2,03,000/-, the appellants are held entitled for an additional amount of Rs.4,19,760/-. The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from filing of the claim application before the Claims Tribunal till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. 9. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. 10. 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 -Shubham