1 CGHC010064042025 2026:CGHC:36087 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 448 of 2025 1 - Kumari Bai W/o Late Anuj Sahu Aged About 43 Years R/o Village Kotarabhatha, Chowki Surgi, Police Station Basantpur, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) (Claimants) 2 - Ku. Sadhna Sahu D/o Late Anuj Sahu Aged About 24 Years R/o Village Kotarabhatha, Chowki Surgi, Police Station Basantpur, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 3 - Lakeshwar S/o Late Anuj Sahu Aged About 22 Years R/o Village Kotarabhatha, Chowki Surgi, Police Station Basantpur, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 4 - Girija Sahu W/o Vivak Kumar Sahu Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Jhitiya, Chowki Tumdibod, Police Station Lalbag, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 5 - Smt. Shakun Sahu W/o Late Bankhram Sahu Aged About 72 Years R/o Village Kotarabhatha, Chowki Surgi, Police Station Basantpur, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Appellant(s) versus 1 - Kirtan Das Sahu S/o Ramprasad Sahu Aged About 27 Years R/o Village Achholi, Tahsil Doundiloahra, Police Station Doundilohara, District Balod (C.G.) (Driver Of Offending Truck No. Cg- 04/ms-3934) 2 - Surjit Singh S/o Gurudayal Singh R/o House No.07, Ward No.18, Gurunanak Nagar Danteshwari, Post Dallirajahara, District Balod (C.G.) (Owner Of Offending Truck No. CG-04/MS-3934) 2 3 - Branch Manager The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Branch Office, Station Road, Nearby L.I.C. Building, Rajnandgaon, Tahsil And District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) (Insurer Of Offending Truck No. CG-04/MS- 3934) ... Respondent(s) For Appellant(s) : Mr. Praveen Dhurandhar, Advocate. For Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 : None For Respondent No.3 Mr. Abhishek Mishra, Advocate on behalf of Mr. B.N. Nande, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal, J. Order on Board (13.08.2026) 1. This is the claimants’ appeal for enhancement against the award dated 10.10.2024 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) in Claim Case No.205/2023 whereby a compensation amount of Rs. 17,09,650/- has been awarded on account of the death of Anuj Sahu, who succumbed to the injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 16.09.2023. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants submits that the learned Tribunal has wrongly assessed the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.9,960/-, which is at lower side as per the minimum wages prevailing on the date of incident i.e. 16.09.2023 for skilled labour. As such, the awarded compensation is liable to be enhanced suitably, holding the deceased as skilled labour. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.3-Insurance Company supported the impugned award and submitted that, based on the evidence, the award has rightly been calculated by the claims tribunal and does not warrant any interference. 3 4. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the record of the Tribunal including award impugned. 5. In the case in hand, the claimants had failed to adduced any evidence with regard to the deceased as skilled labour. Consequently, the learned Tribunal, after appreciating oral and documentary evidence, has assessed the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.9960/- for unskilled labour in accordance with the minimum wage notification issued by the Labour Department for the relevant period. Furthermore, considering that the deceased was between 46 – 50 years of age bracket, the Tribunal added 25% towards future prospects; looking to the number of claimants (05) deducted 1/4th of the income towards personal and living expenses and considering the age bracket (46 – 50 years), applied a multiplier of 13, appropriate for the deceased’s age group. Further, Rs.2,53,000/- under other conventional heads has been awarded. Accordingly, the Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.17,09,650/- in favour of the claimants. 6. Having carefully perused the material on record, this Court is of the considered view that the Tribunal has judiciously appreciated the evidence and there is no evidence to hold that the deceased was a skilled labourer. The quantum of compensation awarded is fair and proper. There is no legal or factual infirmity in the impugned award calling for interference. 7. Accordingly, the appeal of the appellant is hereby dismissed. Sd/- Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Judge pekde Digitally signed by VIJAY BHARATRAO PEKDE Date: 2026.08.18 15:51:40 +0530