1 CGHC010263422023 2026:CGHC:38936 AFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1420 of 2023 1 - Mongara Bai Ghritlahre Wd/o Late Kartik Ram Ghritlahre Aged About 50 Years, R/o - Village- Charauda, Police Station- Palari, District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh 2 - Minor Jyoti Dhritlahre D/o Late Kartik Ram Ghritlahre, Aged About 16 Years, Minor Through The Mother (Natural Guardian) Mongara Bai Ghritlahre Wd/o Late Kartik Ram Ghritlahre, R/o - Village- Charauda, Police Station- Palari, District : Balodabazar- Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh ...Appellant(s) versus 1 - Suraj Banjare S/o Mohan Banjare, Aged About 26 Years R/o - Behind Of Nagar Palika Office, Shakti Ward Bhatapara, Police Station - Bhatapara (Town), District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh (Driver Of The Vehicle Swift Desire Car No. C.G. 22 A.C. 4976). 2 - Swati Varma S/o - Tikamchand Varma, Aged About 30 Years R/o- Panchshil Nagar, Near Of D. K. College, Ward No. -01, Balodabazar, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh (Owner Of The Vehicle Swift Desire Car No. C.G. 22 A.C. 4976). 3 - Ekko General Insurance Company Limited Branch Office- Unit No. - 301, 3rd Floor, F. Wing, Lotus Corporate Park Goregaon (E.) Mumbai- 400063, (Insurer Of The Vehicle Swift Desire Car No. C.G. 22 A.C. 4976). ...Respondent(s) BHOLA NATH KHATAI Digitally signed by BHOLA NATH KHATAI Date: 2026.09.05 15:23:27 +0530 2 For Appellants : Mr. Anand Kesharwani, Advocate For Respondent No.3 : Ms. Aditi Diwan, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Judgment on Board (02.09.2026) 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 seeking enhancement of the amount of compensation, challenging the impugned award dated 25.03.2023 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) in Motor Accident Claim Case No.27/2022, whereby the Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.14,60,632/- as compensation on account of the death of Laxman Ghritlahre, who succumbed to the injuries sustained in a motor accident which occurred on 01.06.2020. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants/claimants submits that the Tribunal has committed a manifest error in deducting 50% of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses. It is contended that the claimants are the widowed mother and the unmarried sister of the deceased and, therefore, the deduction towards personal expenses ought to have been made to the extent of 1/3rd of the income instead of 1/2. In support of his submission, learned counsel has placed reliance upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram, (2018) 18 SCC 130. It is, therefore, submitted that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal deserves to be suitably enhanced. 3. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for respondent 3 No.3/Insurance Company opposes the submission made on behalf of the appellants/claimants and submits that the deduction assessed by the Tribunal is just and proper and does not warrant any interference. It is further submitted that in the case relied upon by the counsel for appellants, the father of the deceased was aged about 65 years, whereas, in the present case, the mother of the deceased was aged about 50 years and, therefore, the said judgment would have no application to the facts of the present case. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions and perused the record of the Tribunal with utmost circumspection. 5. So far as the question of deduction towards personal expenses of the deceased is concerned, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, while considering the said issue in paragraph 16 of its judgment in Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. (supra), observed as under: “16. With respect to the issue of deduction from the income of the deceased, the Insurance Company contended that the deduction ought to have been ½, and not ⅓rd, since the deceased was a bachelor. This issue has been dealt with in para 32 of the judgment in Sarla Verma v. DTC, (2009) 6 SCC 121 wherein this Court took the view that where the family of the bachelor is large and dependent on the income of the deceased, as in a case where he has a widowed mother and large number of younger non-earning sisters or brothers, his personal and living expenses may be restricted to one-third, as contribution to the family will be taken as two-third. Considering that the deceased was living in a village, where he was residing with his aged father who was about 65 years old, and Respondent 2, an unmarried sister, the High Court correctly considered them to be dependants of the deceased, and made a deduction of ⅓rd towards personal expenses of the deceased. The judgment of the High Court is, 4 therefore, affirmed on this count.” 6. In the present case also, the deceased was unmarried and the claimants are his widowed mother, who is a non-earning member, and his unmarried sister. Thus, the factual circumstances of the present case are substantially similar to those considered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. (supra) wherein the deceased was unmarried and the claimants included his father, who was an earning member, and his unmarried sister. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, having regard to the nature and status of the dependants, held that deduction towards personal expenses of the deceased should be one-third of his income. Accordingly, in the present case also, the deduction towards personal expenses is modified from 1/2 to 1/3rd of the income of the deceased. 7. Considering the date of the accident, the age of the deceased (19 years) and the number of dependants, this Court finds that the monthly income assessed by the Tribunal, the addition towards future prospects, the multiplier applied and the amounts awarded under the conventional heads are just, proper and in accordance with law. However, in view of the modification in the deduction towards personal expenses, the compensation is required to be recomputed. 8. Thus, in light of the aforesaid discussion and the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in 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, the compensation is recomputed as under:- 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 5 Sl. No. Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1 Income 8,860x12 =1,06,320 8860 x 12 =1,06,320 2. Future prospects (+)40% (i.e.42528) = 148848 (+)40% (i.e. 42528) = 148848 3. Deduction (-) 1/2 =74,424 (-)1/3rd (i.e. 49,616) = 99,232 4. Multiplier (x) 18 = 13,39,632 (x) 18 = 17,86,176 5. Funeral Expenses 16,500 16,500 6. Loss of Estate 16,500 16,500 7. Loss of consortium 88,000 (44,000 x 2) 88,000 (44,000 x 2) Total Rs. 14,60,632 Rs. 19,07,176 9. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the compensation of Rs.14,60,632/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is hereby enhanced to Rs.19,07,176/-. Thus, after deducting the amount of Rs.14,60,632/- already awarded by the Tribunal, the appellants/claimants are held entitled to an additional/enhanced compensation of Rs.4,46,544/-. The aforesaid additional/enhanced amount of compensation shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition before the Tribunal till its actual realization. The remaining terms and conditions of the impugned award shall remain unaltered. 10. Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed. The impugned award is modified to the extent indicated hereinabove. 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 6 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