1 CGHC010223082024 2026:CGHC:37216 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1588 of 2024 Addltional Director General And H.O.D.G.S.I., C R, Nagpur New Complex, Seminary Hills, Nagpur (Maharastra), Through Anita Singh W/o Kuldeep Singh, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Geological Survey Of India, State Unit, Chhattisgarh, Bhuvigyan Bhawan, Kanchan Ganga Road, Raipur, District- Raipur Chhattisgarh. ..........Appellant/owner. ... Appellant versus 1 - Smt Urmila W/o Late Lakhan Singh Aged About 37 Years R/o Village- Chewradih, P. S. And Tahsil- Ramchandrapur, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. Presently Residing Village- Vishunpur, P. S. And Tahsil - Ramchandrapur, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. 2 - Sanjeev S/o Late Lakhan Singh Aged About 17 Years Through Natural Guardian And Mother Smt. Urmila, W/o Late Lakhan Singh. R/o Village- Chewradih, P. S. And Tahsil- Ramchandrapur, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. Presently Residing Village- Vishunpur, P. S. And Tahsil - Ramchandrapur, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. 3 - Smt. Rajmuni Singh W/o Sukhram Singh Aged About 70 Years R/o Village- Chewradih, P. S. And Tahsil- Ramchandrapur, District 2 Balrampur- Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. Presently Residing Village- Vishunpur, P. S. And Tahsil - Ramchandrapur, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. 4 - Sukhram Singh S/o Late Gola Aged About 79 Years R/o Village- Chewradih, P. S. And Tahsil- Ramchandrapur, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. Presently Residing Village- Vishunpur, P. S. And Tahsil - Ramchandrapur, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. 5 - Amit Kumar Sahu S/o Krishna Sahu Aged About 22 Years R/o Auranga, P. S. Ramchandrapur, District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. .........Driver. --- Respondent(s) For Appellant : Mr. Siddharth Rathod, Advocate For Respondents No.1 & 4 : Mr. Aditya Kumar Mishra, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board (19.08.2026) 1. This is an owner’s appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 challenging the award dated 27.02.2024 passed by 2nd Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Balrampur, Place Ramanujganj (C.G.) in Claim Case No.62/2022 whereby the learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.16,64,200/- as compensation for the death of Lakhan Singh who was aged about 38 years and died in a road accident which took place on 02.07.2022 and fastened the liability upon the Appellant. 2. At this stage, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that he has already deposited 75% of the awarded 3 amount and is also ready to deposit the remaining 25% of the award amount. He has also filed I.A. No. 03/2026 for settlement and compliance of the amount awarded by the learned MACT vide order dated 27.02.2024. CROSS APPEAL FILED BY THE CLAIMANTS 3. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the learned Claims Tribunal has erred in awarding lesser amount of compensation in the facts of the case. The Claims Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased on the lower side and has also awarded lesser amount under other conventional heads, which needs to be enhanced. Therefore, the instant appeal be allowed and the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal may suitably be enhanced. 4. On this point, learned counsel for the Appellant would submits 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. In the case at hand, true it is that the learned Tribunal has taken the monthly income of the deceased to be Rs.7800/-, which ought to be Rs.9960/- as per the Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the office of Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh. Furthermore, in other 4 conventional heads the Tribunal has granted only Rs.1,90,000 which ought to be 2,09,000/-, to that extent the impugned award needs to be modified. 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. 7800 x 12 = 93,600/- Rs. 9960 x 12 = 1,19,520/- 2. Future prospect (+)40% (i.e. Rs. 37,440) = 1,31,040/- (+)40% (i.e. Rs. 47,808) = 1,67,328/- 3. Deduction (-) 1/4 (i.e. 32760) = 98,280/- (-) 1/4 (i.e. 41832) = 1,25,496/- 4. Multiplier (x) 15 = 14,74,200/- (x) 15 = 18,82,440/- 5 Other conventional heads Rs. 1,90,000/- Rs. 2,09,000/- (16500+16500+176 000) Total Rs. 16,64,200/- Rs. 20,91,440/- 8. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs.16,64,200/- awarded by the Claims 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 5 Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.20,91,440/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs.16,64,200/-, the claimants are held entitled for an additional amount of Rs.4,27,240/-. The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim case before the Claims Tribunal till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. 9. So far as I.A. No. 03/2026 for settlement and compliance of the amount awarded by the learned MACT vide order dated 27.02.2024 is concerned, since there is a cross-appeal in this case filed by the claimants for enhancement and the amount of the award has been enhanced, therefore, I.A. No. 03/2026 cannot be entertained. Accordingly, I.A. No. 03/2026 stands dismissed. 10. In the result, the appeal filed by the insurance company is dismissed and the cross-appeal filed by the claimants is partly allowed and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. 11. 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 -Shubham