1 CGHC010368642023 2026:CGHC:36387 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1881 of 2023 1. Urmila Kuruwanshi Wd/o Late Harish Kumar Kuruwanshi, Aged About 26 Years Resident Of Village - Parsada, Post - Borsi, Tahsil - Kashdol, District - Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. (Claimant) 2. Ayansh S/o. Late Harish Kumar Kuruwanshi, Aged About 7 Years Resident Of Village - Parsada, Post - Borsi, Tahsil - Kashdol, District - Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. (Represented Through His Mother Namely Urmila Kuruwanshi.) 3. Diksha Kuruwanhsi D/o. Late Harish Kumar Kuruwanhsi, Aged About 4 Years Resident Of Village - Parsada, Post - Borsi, Tahsil - Kashdol, District - Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. (Represented Through Her Mother Namely Urmila Kuruwanshi.) 4. Amrasutin Bai Wd/o. Late Samaru Lal, Aged About 49 Years Resident Of Village - Parsada, Post - Borsi, Tahsil - Kashdol, District - Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant(s) versus 1. Sanjay Kumar Ratre S/o Son Sonsai Ratre, Aged About 29 Years Resident Of Village - Charpara, Police Station - Malkharauda, District - Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh. (Driver Of Vehicle CG 13 LA 4346) (Driver) BHOLA NATH KHATAI Digitally signed by BHOLA NATH KHATAI Date: 2026.08.17 15:40:01 +0530 2 2. The Director Of Company, M/s Prakash Industries Limited, Address - M/s Prakash Industries Limited (PIL) Champa, District - Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh. (Owner Of Vehicle CG 13 LA 4346) (Owner) 3. Mahendra Kumar Singh S/o. Shri Brajnath Singh, Aged About 50 Years Resident Of Prakash Kunj Kota Dabri, Police Station - Champa, District - Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh. (Supurdar Of Vehicle CG 13 LA 4346) (Supurdar) 4. New India Insurance Company Limited, Through The Branch Manager, Address - Office Address Ambedhkar Chowk Raipur Road Balodabazar, District - Balodabazar- Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. (Insurer Of Vehicle CG 13 LA 4346) ... Respondent(s) For Appellants : Mr. Palash Agrawal, Advocate, with Ms. Gunjan Rani Agrawal, Advocate For Respondent No.4 : Ms. Mansi Bandey, Adv. on behalf of Mr. Sourabh Sharma, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board (14.08.2026) 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 challenging the impugned award dated 07.10.2021, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Balodabazar-Bhatapara (CG), in Motor Accident Claim Case No.31/2020, whereby learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.16,82,800/- as compensation for the death of Harish Kumar Kuruwanshi, who died in a road accident that took place on 21.05.2020. 3 2. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants/claimants submits that the Tribunal has committed a manifest error in assessing the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.8,000/-, which, according to him, is even lower than the minimum wages payable to an unskilled labourer at the relevant time. It is further submitted that the amount of compensation awarded under the conventional heads is also inadequate and that consortium has been awarded only to the wife of the deceased, whereas the other claimants are also entitled to the same in accordance with the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. It is, therefore, submitted that the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal deserves to be suitably enhanced. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.4 – Insurance Company opposes the submission made by the counsel for appellants and submits that in the facts and circumstances of case, the award passed by the Tribunal is just & proper and does not require any enhancement. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection. 5. Though it was claimed by the claimants that at the time of accident the deceased was earning Rs.16,000–17,000 per month by working as a Supervisor, no documentary evidence in this regard has been brought on record to substantiate the said claim. The accident occurred on 21.05.2020 and the minimum wages of even an unskilled labourer at that time was Rs.8,860/-. Accordingly, the monthly income of the deceased is reassessed at Rs.8,860/-, resulting in an annual income of Rs.1,06,320/-. 4 6. The deceased was a non-salaried person aged about 33 years at the time of the accident. There are four claimants i.e. the wife, two children and the mother of the deceased. 7. Considering the date of incident, the age of the deceased 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 Tribunal has awarded Rs.40,000/- towards consortium only to the wife of the deceased, whereas the other claimants are also entitled to consortium in accordance with law. 8. Accordingly, all the four appellants/claimants are held entitled to consortium of Rs.44,000/- each. Further, the amount awarded under the heads of “loss of estate” and “funeral expenses” is enhanced to Rs.16,500/- each. 9. Thus, in light of the aforesaid discussion and the judgments of the Hon’ble 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:- Sl. No. Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1 Income 8000x12 =96,000 8,860 x 12 =1,06,320 2. Future prospects (+)40% (i.e.38,400) = 1,34,400 (+)40% (i.e. 42528) = 1,48,848 3. Deduction (-) 1/4th (i.e. 33,600) =1,00,800 (-)1/4th (i.e. 37,212) = 111636 4. Multiplier (x) 16 = 16,12,800 (x) 16 = 17,86,176 5. Funeral 15,000 16,500 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 5 Expenses 6. Loss of Estate 15,000 16,500 7. spousal/ parental/filial consortium 40,000 1,76,000 (44,000 x 4) Total Rs. 16,82,800/- Rs. 19,95,176/- 10. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs.16,82,800/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to 19,95,176/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs.16,82,800/-, the appellants/claimants are held entitled for an additional amount of Rs.3,12,376/-. The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the appeal before this Court till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. 11. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. 12. The Registry is directed to communicate the claimants in writing “the enhanced/additional 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 reside. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Khatai