1 CGHC010368002023 2026:CGHC:34349 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1897 of 2023 1 - Sitbai Kewat Wd/o Late Ramesh Kumar Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Rampur, Police Station Gidhauri,, District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Khimendra Kumar Kewat, S/o Shri Ramesh Kumar Aged About 12 Years Represented Through His Mother Nemely Sitbai Kenwat) R/o Village Rampur, Police Station Gidhauri,, District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh. 3 - (Deleted) Gautrahin Kenwat as per Honble Court Order Dated 10-03-2026 ... Appellants versus 1 - Irendra Kumar Sahu S/o Shei Shobharam Sahu Aged About 33 Years R/o Village Raveli, Tahsil Simga, Police Station Suhela District Balodabazar Bhatapra Chhattisgarh (Driver of Vehicle CG04HW3682). 2 - Jagdish Singhania, S/o Shri Shankar Lal Singhania, Aged About 50 Years (M/s Singhania Construction Limited) Address Singhania Sadan, Gandhi Chowk, Newra, Police Station And Tehsil Tilda, District Raipur Chhattisgarh (Owner of Vehicle CG 04HW 3682). 3 - The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Address Branch Office Opposite Church, Shankar Nagar Ward Station Road Main Road Bhatapara District Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh (Insurer Of Vehicle Cg 04 HW 3682) ... Respondents For the appellants : Mr. Palash Agrawal, Advocate For the Respondents : ….none ….. ALLENA ANNAJEE RAO Digitally signed by ALLENA ANNAJEE RAO Date: 2026.08.07 10:39:20 +0530 2 (Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judgment on Board 05.08.2026 1. This appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “MV Act”) has been filed seeking enhancement of compensation, challenging the impugned award dated 09.09.2021 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Balauda Bazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh in Claim Case No. 45/2020. whereby a compensation of Rs.14,14,000/- has been awarded. 2. While passing the award dated 09.09.2021, the Tribunal could not take into account the medical expenses of Rs.79,718/- incurred by the claimants vide Ex.P- 41 to P-45 for the treatment of grievous injuries sustained by the deceased. Therefore, subsequently by order dated 23.10.2021 the total compensation of Rs.14,93,718/- has been granted after adding medical expenses amounting to Rs.79,718/-. 3. Brief facts of the case are that deceased Ramesh Kumar died on 12.10.2020 on account of grievous injuries sustained by him in a motor accident took place on 11.10.2020, which was caused due to rash and negligent driving of respondent no.1. Appellant no.1 is widow, appellant no.2 is son and appellant no.3 is mother of deceased. They being legal heirs filed a claim application seeking a total compensation of Rs. 46,15,000/- on various heads. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that claimants have pleaded that the deceased was earning Rs. 15,000/- per month by doing the job of driver, but the learned Claims Tribunal had taken the income of deceased as Rs.8000/- per month which is on lower side. The amounts granted under the other conventional heads are also meagre, thereby, just compensation has not been awarded. He prays that the instant appeal be allowed and the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal may suitably be enhanced. 3 5. I have heard learned counsel for the appellants, considered their rival submissions and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 6. During the pendency of appeal, appellant no.3 mother of deceased has died. Therefore, presently there are two claimants. 7. In absence of any documentary evidence regarding job and income of deceased and looking to the rates prevalent at the time of incident, it would be appropriate to take the monthly income at Rs. 8,960/- treating him as unskilled labour as per the the Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages instead of Rs.8000/- taken by the Tribunal. Since the age of deceased was found to be 39 years and there are 3 dependents, (later 1 died) following the principles laid down by Supreme Court, the Tribunal has added 40% future prospectus, deducted 1/3rd towards personal expenses and applied multiplier 15. The amounts granted under the other heads i.e., loss of estate Rs.15,000/-, funeral expenses Rs.15,000/- and loss of consortium for wife Rs.40,000/- also needs to be suitably enhanced. 8. Thus, in the light of the aforesaid discussion and in view of the decisions of the Supreme Court rendered in National Insurance Company Ltd. Versus Pranay Sethi (2017) 16 SCC 680; Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation (2009) 6 SCC 121 and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. Versus Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram (2018) 18 SCC 130 , this Court is computing the compensation as below : Sl.No. Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1. Total loss of dependency 13,44,000/- Rs.8,960. X 12 =1,07,520/- plus Future Prospectus-40% i.e., 43,008/-= 1,50,528 minus 1/3 deduction of personal expenses i.e.,50,176 = 1,00,352/- x multiplier 15 = 15,05,280/- 2. Loss of estate 15,000/- 16,500/- 3. Funeral expenses 15,000/- 16,500/- 4 4. Loss of consortium 40,000/- (for wife) (44,000 x 2 claimants i.e., wife and son) 88,000/- 5. Medical expenses 79,718/- 79,718/- Total Rs. 14,93,718/- 17,05,998 9. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs. 14,93,718/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.17,05,998 Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs. 14,93,718/- the appellants are held entitled for an additional sum of Rs.2,12,280/-. The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing claim application before the Tribunal till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. 10. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed in part and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated hereinabove. Sd/- Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Judge Rao