1 CGHC010183812021 2026:CGHC:32896 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 431 of 2021 1 - Smt. Amina Begam Wd/o Late Razzak Miya Aged About 27 Years R/o Village Pandaripani Guchapara Post- Biringpal, District- Bastar Chhattisgarh 2 - Master Haidar Miya S/o Late Razzak Miya Aged About 9 Years Appellant No. 2 Is Minor Through Natural Guardian Smt. Amina Begam (Mother) R/o Village Pandaripani Guchapara Post Biringpal District Bastar Chhattisgarh 3 - Miss Jiya Miya D/o Late Razzak Miya Aged About 7 Years Appellant No. 3 Is Minor Through Natural Guardian Smt. Amina Begam (Mother) R/o Village Pandaripani Guchapara Post Biringpal District Bastar Chhattisgarh 4 - Miss Aasin D/o Late Razzak Miya Aged About 6 Years Appellant No. 4 Is Minor Through Natural Guardian Smt. Amina Begam (Mother) R/o Village Pandaripani Guchapara Post Biringpal District Bastar Chhattisgarh 5 - Akbar Miya S/o Late Mahboob Miya Aged About 72 Years R/o Village Pandaripani Guchapara Post Biringpal District Bastar Chhattisgarh Digitally signed by AMIT PATEL 2 ... Appellants versus 1 - Pila Singh @ Pintu Thakur S/o Ram Prasad Thakur R/o Village Biringpal Paltelpara, P. S. Parpa District Bastar Chhattisgarh .......(Driver Of The Vehicle) 2 - Mohan Kashyap S/o Roopsingh Kashyap R/o House No. 3, Badepara Balenga, District Bastar Chhattisgarh .......(Owner Of The Vehicle) 3 - The Cholamandalam M. S. General Insurance Co. Ltd. Through Branch Manager, Branch Office Ward Second Floor, Simran Tower Pandari Road Opposite L. I. C. Building, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh -- Respondents (Cause-titles are taken from CIS) For Appellants : Mr. Pravin Kumar Tulsyan along with Mr. Abhishek Nirala, Advocates. For Respondent Nos.1 & 2 : None present For Respondents No.3 : Mr. Prashant Sahu, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Sangeet Kumar Kushwaha, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Judgment on Board (30.07.2026) 1. This appeal has been filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 by the appellants/claimants for enhancement against the award dated 08.02.2021 passed by learned Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bastar, Place- Jagdalpur (C.G.), in Claim Case No. 143/2019, whereby compensation of Rs. 13,79,600/- with interest @ 9% per annum, in favour of the 3 appellants has been awarded. 2. The gist of the claim before the Tribunal, in brief, is that on 15.05.2019, while the deceased Razzak Miya was going to village- Niyanar on his motorcycle and when he reached near Pandari Pani square Sahdev’ house, the respondent No. 1, drove his Messy Tractor (offending vehicle) bearing Registration No. CG-17-K.K.-1093 in a rash and negligent manner and dashed to the motorcycle from the back side, due to which the deceased sustained injuries on the various parts of his body and he died on the spot. On the basis of the report lodged at Police Station Parpa, District- Bastar, a crime was registered. 3. It is claimed that at the time of accident, deceased Razzak Miya was aged about 35 years and was married. He was engaged in the work of transportation and was employed as a truck driver and earning Rs. 25,000/- per month. Due to the untimely death of Razzak Miya there is an irreparable loss to the claimants who are the father, wife, minor son and daughters of the deceased. Therefore, the claimants had preferred an application before the Tribunal claiming total compensation of Rs. 48,70,000/- u/s 166 of MV Act. 4. The learned Tribunal, after considering the evidence and documents available on record, assessed the income of the deceased to be Rs. 6000/- per month. Added 40% future prospects. Considered the fact that the claimants are the father, 4 wife, minor son and daughters of the deceased, one-fourth of the income was deducted towards personal expenses. Considered the age of the deceased as 31-35 years, multiplier of 16 was applied. Further, a total amount of Rs. 1,70,000/- has been awarded under other heads. Accordingly, the total compensation of Rs.13,79,600/- has been awarded by the Claims Tribunal in favour of the claimants with interest @ 9% per annum against respondent/insurance company, from the date of application. Hence, the appeal is for enhancement. 5. Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants submits that the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is on the lower side and needs to be enhanced suitably. He further submits that the Claims Tribunal has wrongly assessed the income of the deceased as Rs. 6,000/- per month, despite the evidence produced before the learned Tribunal. It is contended that the deceased was engaged in the work of transportation and was employed as a truck driver, earning Rs. 25,000/- per month. In support of this contention, the driving licence of the deceased was produced and exhibited as Ex. A/10-C. It is further submitted that the compensation awarded under the other heads also requires enhancement. Therefore, the appeal may be allowed and compensation needs to be enhanced suitably. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Insurance Company has argued that the Claims Tribunal after appreciating oral and documentary evidence available on record rightly awarded the 5 compensation amount. Hence, the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is just and proper and requires no interference. 7. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 8. As regards the income of the deceased, though the claimants have pleaded that the deceased was engaged in the business of transportation and was working as a truck driver, earning Rs. 25,000/- per month, no documentary evidence has been produced to substantiate the said income. However, the claimants have produced the driving licence of the deceased Razak Miya, which has been exhibited as Ex. A/10-C, thereby establishing that he possessed a valid licence to drive a transport vehicle. Further, from the testimony of Amina Begam (AW-1), the wife of the deceased, it is evident that the deceased had purchased Truck Bearing Registration No. MH-31-CG-2825 in the name of his father and was engaged in the work of transportation by driving the said truck. Thus, the evidence on record clearly establishes that he was working as a truck driver, which is a skilled occupation, keeping in mind the nature of occupation, date of accident 15.05.2019, wage structure prevailing on the date of accident, price index and cost of living etc. specially notification by Labour Department for minimum wages, upon considering the aforementioned factors, I find it appropriate to take income of deceased as Rs.12,000/- per month as minimum wages, at the relevant time of accident. The annual income comes to Rs. 6 1,44,000/- (12,000x12). As per National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others, (2017) 16 SCC 680, future prospects would be 40% as held by the Tribunal. Hence, after adding 40% towards future prospect i.e. Rs. 57,600 (40% of 1,44,000), the yearly income comes to Rs.2,01,600/- (1,44,000+57,600). 9. The deceased was married and the claimants are the father, wife, minor son and daughters, so deduction towards personal expenses one-fourth rightly held by the Tribunal i.e. Rs. 50,400/- (2,01,600 x 1/4) After deduction of the same, the annual dependency comes to Rs.1,51,200/- (Rs.2,01,600-50,400/-). In view of judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121 and National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others, (2017) 16 SCC 680, the multiplier would be 16. Hence, after applying multiplier of 16, the total loss of dependency works out to Rs. 24,19,200/- (1,51,200x16). In addition, Rs.2,30,000/- has been awarded under other conventional heads i.e. loss of estate, loss of consortium, funeral expenses etc., which is just and proper. Therefore, the claimants would become entitled for total compensation of Rs. 26,89,200/-. Thus, the claimants are entitled for compensation in the following manner:- Heads Calculation 7 Compensation towards dependency Rs. 24,19,200/- Towards loss of estate Rs. 15,000/- Towards funeral expenses Rs. 15,000/- Towards loss of consortium to the appellants No.1 to 5 (40,000x 5) (Total= Rs. 2,00,000/-) Rs. 2,00,000/- Total Rs. 26,49,200/- 10. Thus, the total compensation is recomputed as Rs. 26,49,200/- After deducting Rs. 13,79,600/- as awarded by the Tribunal, the enhancement would be Rs.12,69,600/- ( 26,49,200-13,79,600). 11. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. The appellants/ claimants shall be entitled to get Rs. 12,69,600/- in addition to what has already been awarded by the Claims Tribunal. The enhanced amount shall carry interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of filing of the claim petition before the Tribunal till its realization. The rest of the conditions shall remain intact. 12. The Registry is directed to communicate the claimants in writing “the enhanced amount” in this appeal as against the award made by the Tribunal below. The said communication be made in Hindi Deonagri language and the help of paralegal workers may be availed with the co-ordination of Secretary, Legal Aid of the concerned area wherein the claimants resides. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge AMIT PATEL