1 CGHC010437032024 2026:CGHC:32559 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 2405 of 2024 Kapil Dev Amlesh S/o Samaylal @ Samelal Aged About 30 Years Caste Bhaina R/o Village Rumga P.S. Pendra Chowki Kotmi Tehsil Sakola District - Gaurela Pendra - Marwahi (C.G.) (Claiment) ... Appellant versus 1 - Brijbhan Prasad Yadav S/o Shyamlal Yadav Aged About 33 Years Caste Ahir R/o Village Rathar P.S. And Tehsil Sakola District - Gaurela Pendra Marwahi (C.G.) 2 - Prabhat Kesari S/o Motilal Gupta Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Byahari Ward No. 15, Near Jain Temple P.S. And Tehsil Byahari District - Shahdol (Mp) 3 - The Oriental Insurance Company Limited Divisional Office Near Krishna Plaza 100 F.T. Sobhagpura Udaipur (Rajasthan) Pin 313011 --- Respondent(s) For Appellant/Claimant : Mr. Shyam Kumar, Advocate For Respondent No.3 : Mr. Anupam Dubey, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Judgment on Board (29.07.2026) 1. Heard on IA No01/2024 for condonation of delay in filing the appeal barred by 123 days. 2. This is the claimant’s appeal for enhancement of the award. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2026.07.31 11:02:49 +0530 2 allowed. Accordingly, the delay of 123 days in filing the appeal is codoned. 3. With the consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties, the matter is heard finally. 4. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [for short "the Act of 1988"] has been preferred by the appellant/claimant seeking enhancement of compensation, challenging the impugned award dated 22.04.2024 passed in Claim Case No.26/2022, whereby the learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.6,55,864/- as compensation for the death of Samaylal in a road accident which took place on 01.09.2022. 5. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the learned Claims Tribunal has erred in assessing the age of the deceased as 55 years. It is submitted that the deceased was 50 years of age and therefore the multiplier ought to have been applied accordingly. It is further submitted that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under other heads is inadequate and on the lower side. It is, therefore, prayed that the instant appeal be allowed and the compensation awarded by the Tribunal be suitably enhanced. 6. Learned counsel for respondent No.3/insurance company submits that the learned Claims Tribunal, after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence on record, has rightly awarded the compensation. Hence, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper and calls for no interference. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went 3 through the records with utmost circumspection. 8. The first contention raised by learned counsel for the appellant is with regard to the age of the deceased. It is submitted that the Tribunal has wrongly taken the age of the deceased as 55 years, whereas he was 50 years of age. On perusal of the record, it is found that no documentary evidence has been produced by the claimant to prove the age of the deceased. The Claimant, who is the son of the deceased, has stated his own age as 30 years in the claim petition. As per Morgue Intimation Ex.A-5, the age of the deceased was recorded as 55 years. In absence of any other material, the learned Tribunal has rightly assessed the age of the deceased as 55 years. Thus, no interference is warranted on this count. 9. The second contention is that the Tribunal has awarded lesser amount under conventional heads. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi and others, (2017) 16 SCC 680 has prescribed the amounts under conventional heads with 10% increase. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.16,500/- towards loss of estate, Rs.16,500/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.44,000/- towards loss of consortium after granting 10% increase, which is in accordance with Pranay Sethi (supra). No irregularity is found in this regard. 10. In view of the above, I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the impugned award passed by the learned Claims Tribunal. The appeal, being devoid of merit, is hereby dismissed at motion stage itself. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge -Shubham