1 CGHC010129672024 2026:CGHC:31521 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 781 of 2024 1 - Smt. Laxmi Netam W/o Late Rupesh Netam Aged About 27 Years Caste- Gond, Resident of House No. 43, Sonarpara, Village Anjani, Post Pataud, Tahsil and Dist. North Bastar Kanker, C.G. 2 - Minor Urvashi Netam D/o Late Rupesh Netam Aged About 1 Years 6 Months Through Natural Guardian of Their Mother Laxmi Netam, Caste- Gond, Resident of House No. 43, Sonarpara, Village Anjani, Post Pataud, Tahsil and Dist. North Bastar Kanker C.G. 3 - Minor Umang Netam S/o Late Rupesh Netam Aged About 1 Years 6 Months Through Natural Guardian of Their Mother Laxmi Netam, Caste- Gond, Resident Of House No. 43, Sonarpara, Village Anjani, Post Pataud, Tahsil and Dist. North Bastar Kanker C.G. 4 - Sevak Ram Netam S/o Deve Singh Netam Aged About 52 Years Caste- Gond, Resident Of House No. 43, Sonarpara, Village Anjani, Post Pataud, Tahsil and Dist. North Bastar Kanker C.G. 5 - Smt. Kamla Netam W/o Sevak Ram Netam Aged About 50 Years Caste- Gond, Resident of House No. 43, Sonarpara, Village Anjani, Post Pataud, Tahsil And Dist. North Bastar Kanker C.G. 6 - Ku. Sushma Netam D/o Sevak Ram Netam Aged About 22 Years Caste- Gond, Resident of House No. 43, Sonarpara, Village Anjani, Post Pataud, Tahsil and Dist. North Bastar Kanker C.G. 7 - Ku. Riya Netam D/o Sevak Ram Netam Aged About 20 Years Caste- Gond, Resident of House No. 43, Sonarpara, Village Anjani, Post Pataud, Tahsil And Dist. North Bastar Kanker C.G. ... Claimants/Appellants versus 1 - Shahid Raza S/o Ahmad Raza Aged About 22 Years Resident Of Ward No. 10 Nagri, Dist. Dhamtari, C.G. (Driver And Owner). 2 - The Branch Manager National Insurance Company Ltd. 2nd Floor, Mobin Mahal, Lal Ganga Shoping Mall, G.E. Road, Raipur, Dist. Raipur C.G. Pin No. 492001 (Insurance Company) ... Respondents 2 For the appellants : Mr. Amit Kumar Sahu, Advocate For Respondent no.2 : Ms. Meenakshi Gupta, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Ashish Gupta, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judgment on Board 23/07/2026 1. This appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “MV Act”) has been filed seeking enhancement of compensation, challenging the impugned award dated 17th January, 2024 passed by the First Addl. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Uttar Bastar, Kanker, Chhattisgar in Claim Case No. 74/2021. 2. Claimants pleaded that deceased Rupesh Netam died on 08.08.2021 in a motor accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of respondent no.1. There are total 7 claimants in this case. Appellant no.1 is widow and appellants 2 & 3 are children of deceased. Appellants 4 & 5 are mother and father and appellants 6 & 7 are sisters of deceased. They all being legal heirs filed claim application seeking a total compensation of Rs. 25,64,800/- on various heads. 3. The learned claims Tribunal took the monthly income of deceased at Rs.8000/-. Further finding the age of deceased to be 29 years and looking to the number of dependents, added 40% future prospectus, deducted 1/5th towards personal expenses and applied multiplier of 17and thus worked out the total loss of dependency at Rs.18,27,840/-. Further more, Rs. 2,53,000/- has been granted under other conventional heads. Thus a total compensation of Rs.20,80,840/- has been awarded for the death of deceased in favour of the appellants with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of application till its realisation. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the income taken by the tribunal is on lower side. He next submits that there are 7 claimants in this case and the Tribunal has granted loss of consortium for only 5 dependents and the other 2 dependent sisters have not been granted consortium, therefore, the impugned 3 award may suitably be enhanced. 5. Learned counsel for respondent no.2/Insurer submits that the Tribunal has passed the just award which needs no interference. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 7. The claimants pleaded that deceased was earning Rs.10,000/- per month by doing the job of Headmistry and from agricultural works. In absence of any clinching and admissible evidence, looking to the prevalent market rates, it would be appropriate to take the monthly income of deceased as Rs.9,200/- as per the Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages applicable at the time of accident instead of Rs.8000/- taken by the Tribunal. The Tribunal has found the age of deceased to be 29 years and there are 7 claimants in this case. Following the principles laid down by the Supreme Court, it has rightly added 40% future prospects; deducted 1/5th towards personal expenses and applied multiplier 17. It appears that out of total 7 claimants, the Tribunal has granted loss of consortium for only 5 claimants. Under Motor Accident Claims, the Supreme Court has established that every dependent is entitled to a separate compensation for the loss of parental and filial consortium. Thus each claimant is entitled to Rs.44,000/- separately and the total comes to Rs. 3,08,000 (44000 x 7). 8. In the light of the above 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 or loss of income 18,27,840/- Rs. 9,200 x 12 = 1,10,400 plus 40% Future Prospects i.e. 44,160/- = 1,54,560 minus 1/5th deduction of personal expenses 4 i.e., 30,912/- = 1,23,648/- x multiplier 17= 21,02,016/- 2. Loss of estate 16,500/- 16,500/- 3. Funeral expenses 16,500/- 16,500/- 4. Loss of consortium or loss of love and affection (44000 x 5) 2,20,000/- (44000 x 7) 3,08,000/- Total Rs. 20,80,840/- 24,43,016/- 9. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs. Rs. 20,80,840/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 24,43,016/- Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs.20,80,840/- the appellants held entitled for an additional sum of Rs. 3,62,176/- . 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. 10. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed in part and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. Sd/- Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Judge Rao