1 CGHC010087142024 2026:CGHC:31606 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 544 of 2024 1 - Sharda Bai W/o Late Ghanshayam Chandravanshi Aged About 30 Years R/o Vill. Sendri, Thana And Tah. Dongargarh, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh 2 - Ku. Renuka Chandravanshi D/o Late Ghanshayam Chandravanshi Aged About 11 Years Appellant No. 2 Being Minor Through Mother Sharda Bai Chandravanshi, Age About 30 Years, W/o Late Ghanshayam Chandravanshi, R/o Vill. Sendri, Thana And Tah. Dongargarh, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh 3 - Gitanshu S/o Late Ghanshayam Chandravanshi Aged About 6 Years Appellant No. 3 Being Minor Through Mother Sharda Bai Chandravanshi, Age About 30 Years, W/o Late Ghanshayam Chandravanshi, R/o Vill. Sendri, Thana And Tah. Dongargarh, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh 4 - Gagan S/o Late Ghanshayam Chandravanshi Aged About 4 Years Appellant No. 4 Being Minor Through Mother Sharda Bai Chandravanshi, Age About 30 Years, W/o Late Ghanshayam Chandravanshi, R/o Vill. Sendri, Thana And Tah. Dongargarh, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh 5 - Smt. Rambha Bai W/o Late Chanduram Chandravanshi Aged About 52 Years R/o Vill. Sendri, Thana And Tah. Dongargarh, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh BHOLA NATH KHATAI Digitally signed by BHOLA NATH KHATAI Date: 2026.07.25 14:42:18 +0530 2 6 - Smt. Ramshila Bai W/o Late Jhaggar Ram Chandravanshi Aged About 60 Years R/o Vill. Sendri, Thana And Tah. Dongargarh, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh 7 - Smt. Shanti Bai W/o Late Kunvar Singh Chandravanshi Aged About 70 Years R/o Vill. Sendri, Thana And Tah. Dongargarh, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ... Appellants versus 1 - Mohd. Zaid Khan S/o Shri Rafik Khan R/o Pachpedi Naka, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Ashish Rai S/o Bapi Rai R/o 2752, Kaliyani Public School Gali, Laxmi Nagar, Raipur, Tah. And Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Kotak Mahindra Insurance Company Limited Through Its Branch Manager, Branch Office, Branch Office, Shop No. A-9, A- 10, First Floor, Vir Shanker Market, G.E. Road, Bhilai, Tah. And Distt. Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Appellants : Ms. Bhavika Kotecha, Advocate For Respondent No.3 : Mr. Raj Awasthi, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board (23.07.2026) 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 08.12.2023, passed in Claim Case No.114/2022, whereby learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.19,79,400/- as compensation (only in favour of 5 claimants) for the death of Ghanshyam Chandravanshi, who died in a road accident that took place on 06.03.2022. 3 2. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants/claimants submits that the Tribunal has committed a manifest error in assessing the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.9,000/-, which, according to him, is even lower than the minimum wages payable to an unskilled labourer at the relevant time. It is further submitted that the compensation awarded under the conventional heads is also inadequate and deserves to be enhanced in accordance with the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Therefore, the instant appeal be allowed and the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal may suitably be enhanced. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.3 opposes the submission made by the counsel for appellants and submits that in the facts and circumstances of case, the award passed by the Tribunal is just & proper and does not require any enhancement. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection. 5. Though it was claimed that at the time of accident, the deceased was earning Rs.18,000/- per month from the profession of driver and farming, no documentary evidence in this regard has been brought on record. The accident occurred on 06.03.2022 and the minimum wages of even an unskilled labour at that time was Rs.9,280/-. Accordingly, the monthly income of the deceased is reassessed at Rs.9,280/-, resulting in an annual income of Rs.1,11,360/-. 6. n the present case, apart from the wife, three minor children and the mother of the deceased, Respondent Nos. 6 and 7, namely Ramsheela Bai and Shanti Bai, have also been claimed as dependents of the deceased. It is an admitted fact 4 that Respondent No.6 Ramsheela Bai is the maternal aunt and Respondent No.7 Shanti Bai is the maternal grandmother of the deceased. Learned Tribunal, after considering the material on record, has recorded a finding that the claimants have failed to adduce any evidence to establish that Ramsheela Bai and Shanti Bai are issueless and therefore, they cannot be treated as dependents of the deceased. Thus, out of the total 7 claimants, the Tribunal has not treated 2 claimants as dependents of the deceased and, on that basis, has proceeded to compute the compensation. The said finding of the Tribunal appears to be proper and does not warrant any interference. 7. Considering the date of incident, the age of the deceased and the number of dependants, this Court finds that the addition towards future prospects, the deduction towards personal expenses and the multiplier applied by the Tribunal are just, proper and in accordance with law. However, the amounts awarded by the Tribunal under the conventional heads are required to be enhanced suitably in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 8. Thus, in light of the aforesaid discussion and 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, the compensation is recomputed as under:- Sl. No. Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1 Income 9000x12 =108000 9280 x 12 =111360 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 5 2. Future prospects (+)40% (i.e.43200) = 151200 (+)40% (i.e.44544) = 155904 3. Deduction (-) 1/4 (i.e. 37800) =113400 (-)1/4 (i.e. 38976) = 116928 4. Multiplier (x) 16 = 1814400 (x) 16 = 1870848 5. Other conventional heads 1,65,000/- Rs. 2,56,000 [18,000 + 18,000 + 2,20,000 (44,000 x 5)] Total Rs. 19,79,400/- Rs. 21,26,848/- 9. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs.19,79,400/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to 21,26,848/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs.19,79,400/-, the appellants/claimants are held entitled for an additional amount of Rs.1,47,448/-. The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the filing of claim petition before the Tribunal till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. 10. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. 11. 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 reside. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Khatai