1 CGHC010218552019 2026:CGHC:36777 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1214 of 2019 1 - Amardas Dhritlahare S/o Sadhuram Dhritlahare Aged About 40 Years R/o Satnamipara, Gondwara Thana- Kabirnagar, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Smt. Nirmla Dhritlahare W/o Amar Das Dhritlahare Aged About 39 Years R/o Satnamipara, Gondwara Thana- Kabirnagar, District- Raipur, Chhattis- garh................(Claimants), District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant(s) versus 1 - Moh. Shaif S/o Jamanuddin Aged About 21 Years R/o Village And Thana Gahamar, District- Gajipur Uttar Pradesh..............(Driver Of The Offending Vehicle Truck No. C.G. 04/j.D./0698), 2 - Sunil Kumar Singh S/o Hari Mohan Singh Aged About 45 Years R/o Ytharth Senior, In Front Of H.I.G. 170 D.D. Nagar Thana- D.D. Raipur, Dis- trict- Raipur, Chhattisgarh........(Owner Of The Offending Vehicle Truck No. C.G. 04/j.D./0698), 3 - The New India Insurance Limited Through Branch Manager, Behind Of L.I.C. Pandri Raipur, Chhattisgarh............(Insurer Of The Offending Vehicle Truck No. C.G. 04/j.D./0698).............(Insurer), District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) For Appellant : Mr. Arjun Lal Singroul, Advocate For Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Sahil Sahu, advocate appears on behalf of Mr. Rakesh Kumar Manikpuri, Advocate. For Respondent No. 3 : Mr. Anil Gulati, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Sanjay K. Agrawal, Judge Order on Board 2 18.08.2026 1. This appeal has been filed by the appellants/claimants under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “Act of 1988”) seeking enhancement in the compensation amount, against the impugned award dated 02.05.2019 passed by the Learned 2nd Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chhattisgarh (for short “Claims Tribunal”) in Claim Case No. 352/2018, whereby the Claims Tribunal allowed the claimants’ application and awarded Rs. 9,77,200/- along with interest for death of Gangoli Dhritlahare. 2. Learned counsel for the appellants, would submit that the Claims Tri- bunal has erred in awarding the less compensation. He would also submit that the Claims Tribunal erred in assessing income of the de- ceased Rs. 6000/- per month which should be Rs. 8190/- per month as per Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the office of the Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh. He would further submit that under the head of consortium amount has not been awarded by the Claims Tribunal which is liable to be awarded. Learned counsel for the appellant/claimants further submits that the learned Claims Tribunal ought to have applied the principle of "pay and recover" by directing the insurance company to satisfy the award in the first instance with liberty to recover the amount from the owner of the offending vehicle. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents No. 2 would oppose the prayer made by learned counsel for the appellant and submit that compensa- tion awarded by the Claims Tribunal is no higher side which is liable to be reduced. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent/Insurance Company submits that the Claims Tribunal has rightly exonerated the respondent/Insurance Company from its liability to pay the compensation, as the breach of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy stood duly established. He further submits that the offending vehicle was being used without a valid and effective permit on the date of the accident, thereby constitut- ing a breach of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy. It is 3 further submitted that the Insurance Company has successfully proved such breach and, therefore, cannot be held liable to indemnify the owner of the vehicle or to satisfy the award. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival sub- missions made herein above and gone through the records minutely. 6. Learned Claims Tribunal assessed the monthly income of deceased to be 4,500/- however, in the opinion of this Court, as per the Chhattis- garh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the office of Labour Com- missioner, Chhattisgarh, the monthly income of the deceased should be 8190/- (as per minimum wages prescribed at relevant time). Accord- ingly, the monthly income of the deceased is liable to be reassessed at Rs. 8190/-. It is further submitted that the Claims Tribunal has not awarded compensation under the conventional heads in accordance with the prevailing rates, namely, Rs. 18,000/- towards funeral ex- penses, Rs. 18,000/- towards loss of estate, and Rs. 88,000/- towards parental consortium payable to the mother and father of the deceased. Accordingly, the compensation awarded under the aforesaid conven- tional heads deserves to be enhanced. 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 & Ors.3, this Court is computing the compensation as below:- Sr. No Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1. Income 6000x12= 72000 8190x12=98280 2. Future Prospect 40% 28,800 =100800 40% 39312/-; Total 1,37,592/- 3. Deduction (-)1/2 i.e. 50400/- = 50400/- (-)1/2 i.e. 68796/- = 68976/- 1(2017) 16 SCC 680 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 3(2018) 18 SCC 130 4 4. Multiplier 50400 x 18= 9,07,200/- 68796 x 18 = 12,38,328 5. Loss of Estate - 18,000/- 6. Funeral Expenses - 18,000/- 7. Other heads 70,000 (Funeral and other heads) Loss of Consortium to appellants No. 1 & 2 - 48,000x2 = 88,000 Total 9,77,200/- 13,62,328/- 8. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs. 9,77,200/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 13,62,328/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs. 9,77,200/-, the appellants/claimants are held to be entitled to an additional amount of Rs. 3,85,128/-. 9. So far as the liability of the Insurance Company is concerned, the learned Claims Tribunal recorded a finding that the offending vehicle was being used without a valid and effective permit on the date of the accident and, therefore, held that there was a breach of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy. Consequently, the learned Claims Tribunal exonerated respondent No.3/Insurance Company from its lia- bility to pay the compensation. However, considering that the claimants are innocent third-party victim, and in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Amrit Paul Singh v. Tata AIG General In- surance Co. Ltd., this Court is of the considered opinion that the prin- ciple of “pay and recover” deserves to be applied. Accordingly, re- spondent No.3/Insurance Company is directed to satisfy the award in the first instance and shall thereafter be at liberty to recover the amount so paid from respondent Nos.1 and 2, namely, the driver and owner of the offending vehicle, in accordance with law. 10.Accordingly, respondent No.3/Insurance Company is directed to satisfy the award in the first instance and shall thereafter be at liberty to re- cover the additional amount from respondent Nos.1 and 2, the owner and driver of the offending vehicle, in accordance with law. 5 11.The concerned respondent No. 3 is directed to deposit the amount of compensation as enhanced by this Court within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @7.5% per annum from the date of filing of claim application before the Tribunal till its realiza- tion. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. 12.Accordingly, this appeal is allowed in part and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Jyoti