1 CGHC010432712024 2026:CGHC:38239 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 5 of 2025 1 - Smt. Meena Sahu W/o Late Tejkumar Sahu Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Chivrakuta, Police Station Singhoda, Tahsil Saraipali, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. 2 - Minor Ansh Sahu S/o Late Tejkumar Sahu Aged About 3 Years Minor, Through His Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Meena Sahu Wife Of Late Tejkumar Sahu (Appellant No. 1), R/o Village Chivrakuta, Police Station Singhoda, Tahsil Saraipali, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. 3 - Minor Rohan Sahu S/o Late Tejkumar Sahu Aged About 3 Years Minor, Through His Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Meena Sahu Wife Of Late Tejkumar Sahu (Appellant No. 1), R/o Village Chivrakuta, Police Station Singhoda, Tahsil Saraipali, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. 4 - Kishore Sahu S/o Sukdev Sahu Aged About 55 Years R/o Village Chivrakuta, Police Station Singhoda, Tahsil Saraipali, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. 5 - Smt. Pratima Sahu W/o Kishre Sahu Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Chivrakuta, Police Station Singhoda, Tahsil Saraipali, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. ... Appellants versus 1 - Trivedi Laljee Bhai Babulal Son Of Trivedi Babulal, Resident Of Village Post Umta (Navarangpura), Police Station And Tahsil BHOLA NATH KHATAI Digitally signed by BHOLA NATH KHATAI Date: 2026.08.29 13:33:40 +0530 2 Visnagar, District Meysan (Gujrat), (Driver Of Offending Bus No. GJ - 36/ T – 5105) 2 - Naveen Chandra Patel S/o Prahallad Bhai Patel R/o Village And Post Rajeev Nagar, Morvi 363642, District Rajkot (Gujrat), (Driver Of Offending Bus No. GJ - 36/ T – 5105) 3 - The New India Insurance Company Limited Through Manager, Divisional Office, Behind Jeevan Bima Office, Pandari, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. (Insurer Of Offending Bus No. GJ - 36 T - 5105) ... Respondent(s) For Appellants : Ms. Prachi Singh, Advocate For Respondent No.3 : Mr. H. P. Agrawal, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board (25.08.2026) 1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short the "Act of 1988") has been preferred by the appellants/claimants challenging the impugned award dated 11.09.2024, passed by the First Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Saraipali, District Mahasamund (CG), in Claim Case No.32/2020, whereby learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.15,61,200/- as compensation for the death of Tejkumar Sahu, who died in a road accident that took place on 27.05.2020. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants/claimants submits that the Tribunal has committed a manifest error in assessing the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.6,000/-, which, according to her, is even lower than the minimum wages payable to an unskilled labourer at the relevant time. It is, therefore, submitted that the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal deserves to be suitably enhanced. 3 3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.3 – Insurance Company opposes the submission made by the counsel for appellants and submits that in the facts and circumstances of case, the award passed by the Tribunal is just & proper and does not require any enhancement. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection. 5. Though it was claimed by the claimants that at the time of the accident the deceased was earning Rs.25,000/- per month by working as a priest (Purohit and Jajmani), no documentary evidence has been brought on record to substantiate the said claim. The accident occurred on 27.05.2020 and, at the relevant time, the minimum wages prescribed even for an unskilled labourer were Rs.8,860/- per month. Accordingly, the monthly income of the deceased is reassessed at Rs.8,860/-, resulting in an annual income of Rs.1,06,320/-. 6. The deceased was a non-salaried person aged about 27 years at the time of the accident. There are total five claimants i.e. the wife, two children and parents of the deceased. 7. Considering the date of the accident, the age of the deceased and the number of dependants, this Court finds that the addition towards future prospects, deduction towards personal expenses, the multiplier applied and the amount awarded under conventional heads by the Tribunal are just, proper and in accordance with law. 8. Thus, in light of the aforesaid discussion and the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in National Insurance 4 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, the compensation is recomputed as under:- Sl. No. Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1 Income 6000x12 =72,000 8860 x 12 =1,06,320 2. Future prospects (+)40% (i.e.28800) = 100800 (+)40% (i.e. 42528) = 148848 3. Deduction (-) 1/4th (i.e. 25200) =75600 (-)1/4th (i.e. 37,212) = 1,11,636 4. Multiplier (x) 17 = 1285200 (x) 17 = 18,97,812 5. Funeral Expenses 18,000 18,000 6. Loss of Estate 18,000 18,000 7. spousal/ parental/filial consortium 2,40,000 (48,000 x 5) 2,40,000 (48,000 x 5) Total Rs. 15,61,200 Rs. 21,73,812 9. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the compensation of Rs.15,61,200/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.21,73,812/-. Accordingly, after deducting the amount of Rs.15,61,200/- already awarded by the Tribunal, the appellants/claimants are held entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.6,12,612/-. The additional/enhanced amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition before the Tribunal till its realization. The remaining terms and conditions of the impugned award shall remain unaltered. 10. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 5 11. The Registry is directed to communicate the claimants in writing “the enhanced/additional 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 reside. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Khatai