1 CGHC010279932021 2026:CGHC:32074 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 740 of 2021 1. Somaru Kashyap S/o Shri Kamluram Kashyap Aged About 39 Years R/o Ward No. 09 Sadakpara Turpura Post Garenga District Bastar Chhattisgarh 2. Smt. Jaimani Kashyap W/o Shri Somaru Kashyap Aged About 38 Years R/o Ward No. 09 Sadakpara Turpura Post Garenga District Bastar Chhattisgarh 3. Haresh Kumar Kashyap S/o Shri Somaru Kashyap Aged About 18 Years R/o Ward No. 09 Sadakpara Turpura Post Garenga District Bastar Chhattisgarh. --- Appellants versus 1. Houshila Prasad Dubey S/o Late Dayaram Dubey Aged About 60 Years Occupation Driver R/o Panchvati Nagar Mova District Raipur Chhattisgarh (Driver Of The Vehicle) 2. M/s Gappu Mahendra Travels Pvt. Ltd. Through Director Kamaljeet Kaur W/o Late Satwant Singh Gill Presently Aged About 52 Years R/o Raja Talab Raipur Chhattisgarh. (Owner Of The Vehicle) 3. The Branch Manager The Oriential Insurance Co. Ltd. Add. Beside Of Hotal Laxman Evenue Mandi Road Jagdalpur District Bastar Chhattisgarh. (Insurer Of The The Offending Vehicle) --- Respondent(s) MAC No. 749 of 2021 1. Ishwar S/o Shri Mahadev Aged About 52 Years R/o Village Chindgaon Post Jaibel District Bastar Chhattisgarh BHOLA NATH KHATAI Digitally signed by BHOLA NATH KHATAI Date: 2026.07.29 12:19:16 +0530 2 2. Smt. Ratna W/o Shri Ishwar Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Chindgaon Post Jaibel District Bastar Chhattisgarh 3. Dashrath S/o Shri Ishwar Aged About 18 Years R/o Village Chindgaon Post Jaibel District Bastar Chhattisgarh 4. Ku. Limbati D/o Shri Ishwar Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Chindgaon Post Jaibel District Bastar Chhattisgarh ---Appellants Versus 1. Houshila Prasad Dubey S/o Late Dayaram Dubey Aged About 60 Years Occupation Driver R/o Panchvati Nagar Mova District Raipur Chhattisgarh ......(Driver Of The Vehicle) 2. M/s Gappu Mahendra Trevels Pvt. Ltd. Through Director Kamaljeet Kaur W/o Late Satwant Singh Gill Presently Aged About 52 Years R/o Raja Talab Raipur Chhattisgarh ........ (Owner Of The Vehicle) 3. The Branch Manager The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Address Beside Of Hotel Laxman Evenue Mandi Road Jagdalpur District Bastar Chhattisgarh .........(Insurer Of The Offending Vehicle) --- Respondent(s) For Claimants : Mr. Vikash A. Shrivastava, Advocate For Insurance Company : Mr. Deepak Gupta, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Judgment on Board (27.07.2026) 1. Since, both the appeals arise out of same accident, therefore, they are being heard and decided by this common order. 2. Both the appeals under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short the "Act of 1988") have been preferred by the claimants seeking enhancement of the amount of compensation, challenging the impugned award dated 3 20.02.2020, passed in Claim Case No.33/2019 and Claim Case No.34/2019, whereby the learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.10,52,800/- as compensation for the death of Dileshwar Kashyap and Rs. 9,77,200/- as compensation for the death of Pilu Singh Baghel, both of whom died in a road accident which took place on 30.07.2018. 3. Learned counsel for the claimants would submit that the Tribunal has erred in awarding lesser amount of compensation in the facts of the cases. The Claims Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased persons on the lower side. The deceased persons were teachers and running tuition classes, therefore, in the absence of any income document, they fall under the category of skilled labour and as per the Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the office of Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh, their income ought to have been assessed at Rs.9,530/-. He further submits that the Claims Tribunal has also awarded lesser amount under other heads which needs to be enhanced. Therefore, both the appeals be allowed and the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal may suitably be enhanced. 4. Learned counsel for 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. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection. 4 6. In the case at hand, true it is that the Tribunal has taken the monthly income of the deceased Dileshwar to be Rs.6,500/- and Pilu Singh to be Rs.6,000/-. As per Ex.PA5C, the deceased were the students of B.E. Computer Sc. and Engg., therefore, their income ought to be Rs.9,530/-. The impugned award needs to be modified to that extent. 7. Considering the date of incident, the age of the deceased persons 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 in 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:- MAC No.740/2021 (for the death of Dileshwar Kashyap) Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1. Income Rs. 6500 x 12 = 78,000/- Rs. 9530 x 12 = 1,14,360/- 2. Future (+)40% (i.e. Rs. 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 5 prospect --------- 45,744) = 1,60,104 3. Deduction (-) 1/2 (i.e. 39000) = 39,000/- (-) 1/2 (i.e. 80052) = 80,052/- 4. Multiplier (x) 18 = 7,02,000/- (x) 18 = 14,40,936/- 5. Future Prospect (+)40% (i.e. Rs. 2,80,800) = 9,82,800/- ------------ 6. Other conventional heads Rs. 70,000/- Rs. 1,50,000/- {(15000 + 15000 + 120000 (40,000x3)} Total Rs. 10,52,800/- Rs. 15,90,936/- 9. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs.10,52,800/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal for the death of Dileshwar Kashyap is enhanced to Rs.15,90,936/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs.10,52,800/-, the appellants/claimants of deceased Dileshwar are held entitled for an additional amount of Rs.5,38,136/-. MAC No.749/2021 (for the death of Pilu Singh Baghel) Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1 Income Rs. 6000 x 12 = 72,000/- Rs. 9530 x 12 = 1,14,360/- 2. Future prospect --------- (+)40% (i.e. Rs. 45,744) = 1,60,104 3. Deduction (-) 1/2 (i.e. 36000) = 36,000/- (-) 1/2 (i.e. 80052) = 80,052/- 4. Multiplier (x) 18 = 6,48,000/- (x) 18 = 14,40,936/- 5. Future (+)40% (i.e. Rs. 6 Prospect 2,59,200) = 9,07,200/- ------------ 6. Other conventional heads Rs. 70,000/- Rs. 1,90,000/- {(15000 + 15000 + 160000 (40,000x4)} Total Rs. 09,77,200/- Rs. 16,30,936/- 10. The amount of compensation of Rs.9,77,200/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal for the death of Pilu Singh Baghel is enhanced to Rs.16,30,936/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs.9,77,200/-, the appellants/claimants of deceased Pilu Singh are held entitled for an additional amount of Rs.6,53,736/- 11. The additional amount of compensation in both the appeals shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim applications before the Tribunal till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned awards shall remain intact. 12. In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed and the impugned awards stand modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. 13. The Registry is directed to communicate the claimants in writing “the enhanced amount” in the appeals 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