1 CGHC010168072025 2026:CGHC:34233 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1003 of 2025 1 - Chandrika Netam W/o Late Sansai Netam Aged About 26 Years R/o Village - Navagaon, Post - Chichiya, Thana - Devbhog, District - Gariyabandh (Chhattisgarh), (Claimants) 2 - (Minor) Chandra Shekhar S/o Late Sansai Netam Aged About 7 Years (Minor Through Legal Guardian Chandrika Netam W/o Late Sansai Netam Appellant No. 1), R/o Village - Navagaon, Post - Chichiya, Thana - Devbhog, District - Gariyabandh (Chhattisgarh) 3 - Bhola Ram Netam S/o Adhiram Netam Aged About 27 Years R/o Village - Navagaon, Post - Chichiya, Thana - Devbhog, District - Gariyabandh (Chhattisgarh) ... Appellant(s) versus 1 - Khetripal Nagesh S/o Tejram Nagesh Aged About 19 Years R/o Village - Navagaon, Thana - Devbhog, District - Gariyabandh (Chhattisgarh), (Driver Of The Offending Vehicle Activa Scoty No. C.G.23/ J./3064) 2 - Upendra Nagesh S/o Tejram Nagesh Aged About 23 Years R/o Village - Navagaon, Thana - Devbhog, District - Gariyabandh (Chhattisgarh), (Registered Owner Of The Offending Vehicle Activa Scoty No. C.G.23/ J./3064) 3 - Branch Manager Through - Bajaj Alliance Insurance Company Limited, 2nd Floor, Shiv Mohan Bhawan, Vidhan Sabha Road, Pandri, Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.), (Insurer Of The Offending Vehicle Activa Scoty No. C.G.23/ J./3064) ... Respondent(s) For Applicants : Mr. A.L. Singroul, Advocate For Respondent No.2 : Ms. Jyoti Kaushik, Advocate For Respondent No.3 Mr. Raj Awasthi, Advocate VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2026.08.07 11:05:17 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Judgment on Board 05.08.2026 1. Heard on I.A. No.01 an application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. 2. Upon due consideration and for the reasons assigned in the application, the same is allowed. 3. Delay of 70 days in filing the appeal is hereby condoned. 4. With the consent of the parties the matter is heard finally. 5. 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 14.11.2024, passed in Claim Case No.08/2022, whereby the learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.13,20,000/- as compensation for the death of Sansai Netam. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the learned Claims Tribunal has erred in awarding an inadequate amount of compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. It is contended that the Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased on the lower side and has also awarded inadequate compensation under the conventional heads, warranting suitable enhancement. Accordingly, it is prayed that the impugned award be modified by enhancing the compensation. Learned counsel further submits that even assuming there was a breach relating to the driving licence, the offending vehicle was admittedly covered by a valid and effective insurance policy on the date of the accident. Therefore, while safeguarding the rights of the claimants, this Court may direct the 3 Insurance Company to satisfy the award in the first instance with liberty to recover the amount from the owner/driver of the offending vehicle, in accordance with law. 7. 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. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection. 9. In the case at hand, the learned Tribunal has taken the monthly income of the deceased to be Rs.7,800/-, which ought to be Rs.8860/- as per the Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the office of Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh and further. Furthermore, in other conventional heads the Tribunal has granted only Rs.1,50,000 which ought to be 1,65,000/-, to that extent the impugned award needs to be modified. 10. 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:- 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 4 Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1 Income Rs. 7800 x 12 = 93,600/- Rs. 8860 x 12 = 1,06,320/- 2. Future prospect (+)25% (i.e. Rs. 23,400) = 1,17,000/- (+)25% (i.e. Rs.26,580/-) = 1,32,900/- 3. Deduction (-) 1/3 (i.e.39,000) = 78,000/- (-) 1/3 (i.e.44,300) = 88,600/- 4. Multiplier (x) 15 = 11,70,000/- (x) 15 = 13,29,000/- 5 Other conventional heads Rs. 1,50,000/- Rs. 1,65,000/- (16,500+16,500+1,32, 000/-) Total Rs. 13,20,000/- Rs. 14,94,000/- 11. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs.13,20,000/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.14,94,000/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs.13,20,000/-, the appellants are held entitled for an additional amount of Rs.1,74,000/-. 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. 12. So far as the prayer for issuing an order of “pay” and “recover” is concerned, in the present case, admittedly, the offending vehicle was insured with respondent No.3 on the date of accident but due to breach of policy condition the insurance company has been exonerated. However, taking into consideration the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Amrit Paul Singh and Another Vs. Tata AIG General Insurance Company Limited and Others reported in (2018) 7 SCC 558 ordering the insurance company to pay first and then recover and also taking note of the facts and circumstances of the present case, particularly the fact that 5 at the time of accident the vehicle was insured with the Insurance Company, it is directed that the Insurance Company shall first pay the amount of compensation awarded to the appellants/claimants and then recover the same from the owner and the driver of the offending vehicle jointly or severally. 13. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. 14. 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 Vaishali