1 CGHC010353072024 2026:CGHC:31356 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 2048 of 2024 1 - Kumariya Wd/o Late Sanuram Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Tukudand, Police Station and Tahsil Pratappur, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Samman Singh S/o Late Sanuram Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Tukudand, Police Station and Tahsil Pratappur, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellants versus 1 - Rampyare, S/o Lalaram Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Tukudand, Police Station And Tahsil Pratappur, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh. (Driver and Owner). 2 - Branch Manager, Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited, Branch Office, 2nd Floor, Shiv Mohan Bhawan, Vidhansabha Road, Pandri, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. (Insurance Company). ... Respondents For the appellants : Mr.Vikash Pandey, Advocate For the respondent no.1 : None For respondent no.2 Mr. Raj Awasthi, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judgment on Board 22.07.2026 1. This appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “MV Act”) has been filed seeking enhancement of compensation and challenging the impugned award dated 23rd May, 2024 passed by the 2 Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Pratappur, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh in Claim Case No. 41/2021 a total compensation of Rs. 4,46,400/- was awarded as a compensation for the death of deceased. 2. As per facts pleaded in claim petition, deceased Sanuram died on 05.01.2021 during treatment on account of an accident took place on 04.-01.2021 due to rash and negligent driving of respondent no.1. Appellant no.1 is widow and appellant no. 2 is son of the deceased and they being legal heirs filed claim application seeking a total compensation of Rs.13,81,000/-. Respondent No.2 Insurance Company has been exonerated from the liability. 3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that claimants have pleaded that the deceased was earning Rs.15,000/- per month by running a Kirana Shop, but the learned Claims Tribunal had meagerly taken a notional income of Rs.4500/- per month. The amounts granted under the conventional heads are also meagre, thereby, just compensation has not been awarded. He further submits that the vehicle was insured with respondent no.2, therefore, the Tribunal ought to have passed pay and recover order. He prays that the instant appeal be allowed and the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal may suitably be enhanced. 4. Learned counsel for respondent no.2/Insurer referring to Insurance Policy submits that the deceased was sitting as a pillion rider and no premium was paid for the pillion rider, therefore, pay and recover order cannot be passed in this case. He further submits that the appellant has failed to prove the nature of occupation and the income of deceased by producing clinching and admissible evidence, hence, the Tribunal is justified in taking the notional income for calculating compensation and thus it has passed the just award which needs no interference. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 3 6. In absence of any proof regarding income of deceased, It would be appropriate to take his monthly income as Rs. 8,960/- treating him as unskilled labour as per the the Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages and to that extent the impugned award needs to be modified. Since the age of deceased was found to be 60 years and there are two dependents, following the case- law laid down by Supreme Court, the Tribunal has rightly added 10% future prospectus, deducted 1/3rd towards personal expenses and applied multiplier 9 which cannot be said to be unsustainable. The Tribunal has awarded a lesser sum of Rs.50,000/- for loss of love and affection for the two claimants. However, the amounts granted for funeral expenses and loss of estate are found to be higher side. 7. Thus, in the light of the aforesaid discussion and in view of the decisions of the Supreme Court rendered in National Insurance Company Ltd. Versus Pranay Sethi (2017) 16 SCC 680; Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation (2009) 6 SCC 121 and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. Versus Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram (2018) 18 SCC 130 , this Court is computing the compensation as below : Sl.No. Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1. Total loss of dependency 3,56,400/- Rs. 8,960 X 12 = 1,07,520/- plus Future Prospectus- 10% i.e., 10,752/- = 1,18,272/- minus 1/3rd deduction of personal expenses i.e., 39,424 = 78,848 x multiplier 9 = 7,09,632/- 2. Loss of estate 20,000/- 16,500/- 3. Funeral expenses 20,000/- 16,500/- 4 4. Loss of consortium or loss of love and affection 50,000/- 44,000x2 dependents 88,000/- Total Rs. 4,46,400/- 8,30,632/- 8. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs. 4,46,400/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 8,30,632/- Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs. 4,46,400/- the appellants held entitled for an additional sum of Rs. 3,84,232/- The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing claim application before the Tribunal till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. 9. Since Ex.P-1 shows that the risk of pillion rider is not covered, pay and recover order cannot be passed in this case. 10. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed in part and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated hereinabove. Sd/- Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Judge Rao