1 CGHC010106152022 2026:CGHC:33261 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 517 of 2022 1 - Kishnath Bariha S/o Late Milan Briha, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Village - Amlor, Police Station And Tahsil - Chhura, District - Gariyaband Chhattisgarh. 2 - Ratan Bariha S/o Kishnath Bariha, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Village - Amlor, Police Station And Tahsil - Chhura, District - Gariyaband Chhattisgarh. 3 - Ratnu Bariha S/o Kishnath Bariha, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Village - Amlor, Police Station And Tahsil - Chhura, District - Gariyaband Chhattisgarh. 4 - Digeshwari Bariha D/o Kishnath Bariha, Aged About 18 Years, R/o Village - Amlor, Police Station And Tahsil - Chhura, District - Gariyaband Chhattisgarh. 5 - Milan Bariha (Died) As Per Honble Court Order Dated 19-12-2025 And 13-01-2026. 6 - Smt. Ramsheela Bariha, W/o Late Milan Bariha, Aged About 55 Years, R/o Village - Amlor, Police Station And Tahsil - Chhura, District - Gariyaband Chhattisgarh. ... Appellants versus 1 - Parmeshwar Nayak S/o Chainuram Nayak R/o Village - Bharuwamuda, Police Station And Tahsil - Chhura, District - Gariyaband Chhattisgarh. (Non-Applicant No. 1) Driver Of Vehicle Tractor – Trolley. 2 - Ishwar Lal Nihal R/o Village - Nawapara Kosmi, Post And Police Station - Chhura, District Gariyband (C.G.). Registered Owner Of Vehicle Tractor – Trolley. 3 - The Branch Manager, HDFC General Insurance Company Limited, SOURABH PATEL Digitally signed by SOURABH PATEL Date: 2026.08.01 11:51:08 +0530 2 Through Branch Manager, Devendra Nagar, Gariyaband, District - Gariyaband (C.G.). (Insurer Of Vehicle Tractor-Trolley). ... Respondents For Appellants : Ms. Pooja Yadav, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Anand Kesharwani, Advocate. For Respondents No.1 & 2 : None. For Respondents No.3 : Mr. Harshmandar Rastogi,Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Judgment on Board (31.07.2026) 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 27.04.2017, passed in Claim Case No. 29/2014, whereby the learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.4,57,000/- as compensation for the death of Ganeshi Bai, who died in a road accident which took place on 20.04.2012. 2. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the learned Claims Tribunal has erred in awarding lesser compensation in the facts and circumstances of the case. It is contended that the learned Claims Tribunal erroneously assessed the monthly income of the deceased at Rs. 3,000/-, whereas it ought to have been assessed at Rs. 4,498/- per month in accordance with the Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the Office of the Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh. Learned counsel further submits that the learned Claims Tribunal failed to award any amount towards future prospects, whereas an addition of 25% ought to have been made in accordance with the settled principles of law. It is further submitted that, since appellant No. 5 died during the pendency of the present appeal, the deduction towards the personal and living expenses of the 3 deceased ought to have been 1/4 of the income instead of 1/5, as applied by the learned Claims Tribunal. It is also contended that the learned Claims Tribunal awarded inadequate amounts under the conventional heads. It is, therefore, prayed that the present appeal be allowed and the compensation awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal be suitably enhanced. 3. None appears for respondent No. 1 and 2 during final hearing of this case. 4. Learned counsel for respondent No.3/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. 6. The learned Claims Tribunal assessed the monthly income of the deceased at Rs. 3,000/-. However, in the opinion of this Court, in terms of the Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the Office of the Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh, the monthly income of the deceased should be taken at Rs. 4,498/-, being the minimum wages prescribed at the relevant time. The learned Claims Tribunal did not award any amount towards future prospects. However, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi and Others , (2017) 16 SCC 680, this Court finds it appropriate to add 25% towards future prospects to the income of the deceased, as the deceased was about 40 years of age at the time of the accident. Further, since appellant No. 5 died during the pendency of the present appeal, the number of dependents stood reduced to five. Accordingly, 1/4 of the income of the deceased is liable to be deducted towards his personal and living expenses instead of 4 1/5, as deducted by the learned Claims Tribunal. The multiplier of 15 applied by the learned Claims Tribunal is found to be just and proper. Under the conventional heads, the learned Claims Tribunal awarded only Rs. 25,000/-, whereas the claimants are entitled to Rs. 2,30,000/-. To that extent, the impugned award warrants modification by reassessing the monthly income of the deceased and consequently recalculating the compensation payable. 7. Thus, in light of the aforesaid discussion and in light of 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, this Court is computing the compensation as below:- Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1 Income Rs. 3,000 x 12 = 36,000/- Rs. 4,498 x 12 = 53,976/- 2. Future prospect Nil- (+)25% (i.e. Rs. 13,494) = 67,470/- 3. Deduction (-) 1/5 (i.e. 7,200) = 28,800/- (-) 1/4 (i.e. 16,867.5) = 50,602.5/- in round figure 50,603/- 4. Multiplier (x) 15 = 4,32,000/- (x) 15 = 7,59,045/- 5 Other conventional heads Rs. 25,000/- (5,000+5,000+5,000+ 10,000) Rs. 2,30,000/- (15,000+15,000+2,00 ,000) Total Rs. 4,57,000/- Rs. 9,89,045/- 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 5 8. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs.4,57,000/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.9,89,045/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs.4,57,000/-, the appellants are held entitled for an additional amount of Rs.5,32,045/-. The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from filing of the claim application before the Claims Tribunal till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. 9. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. 10. 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 resides. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge $ourabh