1 CGHC010195972025 2026:CGHC:41982 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1093 of 2025 1 - Nirmala Bai Wd/o Late Rajkumar Kumbhkar Aged About 58 Years R/o Village - Bargawan, Police Station and Tahsil - Akaltara, District Janjgir- Champa (C.G.). 2 - Rakesh Kumar Kumbhkar S/o Late Rajkumar Kumbhkar Aged About 31 Years R/o Village - Bargawan, Police Station and Tahsil - Akaltara, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.). 3 - Rajendra Kumar Kumbhkar S/o Late Rajkumar Kumbhkar Aged About 25 Years R/o Village - Bargawan, Police Station and Tahsil - Akaltara, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Appellants versus 1 - Pramod Kumar Sahu S/o Manharan Lal Sahu Occupation - Driver, R/o Village - Kodapuri, Post - Sagar, Police Station - Sakri, District - Bilaspur (C.G.), (Driver and Owner of the Vehicle Auto No.- C.G.-10-A.G./8658), (Non-Applicant). 2 - United India Insurance Company Limited Branch Manager - L.I.C. Building, 1st Floor, Magarpara Road, Police Station - Civil Line, Bilaspur, Tahsil And District - Bilaspur (C.G.), (Insurer of The Vehicle Auto No.- C.G.- 10-A.G./8658) ... Respondents For the appellants : Mr. Anand Kesharwani, Advocate For respondent no.1 : Mr. Syed Afaque Hussain, Advocate For Respondent No.2 : Mr. Raj Awasthi, Advocate (Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) 2 Order on Board 26.09.2026 Heard finally with the consent of both the parties. 1. This appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “MV Act”) has been filed by the claimants seeking enhancement of compensation, challenging the impugned award dated 06.03.2025 passed by the IV Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh in Claim Case No. 112/2022 whereby a total compensation of Rs.7,93,008/- has been granted for the death of deceased. 2. The pleadings made in claim application filed under Section 166 of the MV Act are that deceased Rajkumar Kumbhkar aged about 60 years died in a motor accident occurred on 11.07.2021 due to sudden brakes applied by respondent no.1 who drove Auto No.CG.10-A.G/8658 in which the deceased was travelling and fell down from Auto. Appellant No.1 is widow and appellant no.2 & 3 are sons of deceased. They being legal heirs of deceased filed claim application seeking a total compensation of Rs. 11,48,992/- on various head. 3. Learned counsel for the appellants confines his argument to the extent that no future prospects has been added to the income of deceased, but, on the other hand, it has been reduced by 10% thereby lesser compensation has been awarded. He prays that the compensation awarded by the tribunal be suitably enhanced to that extent. 4. Learned counsel for respondent no.3/Insurer submits that the just compensation has been awarded by the Tribunal which needs no 3 interference. . 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 6. The income taken, deduction made towards personal expenses and the multiplier adopted by the Tribunal is not disputed by learned counsel for the appellant. He only prays that since no future prospects has been added to the income and in fact the income has been reduced by 10%, therefore, the compensation granted by Tribunal may be recomputed by adding future prospects to the income of deceased. 7. Since the deceased was found to be aged about 60 years, as per the established legal principles, it would be appropriate to grant 10% addition for future prospects. 8. In view of the limited prayer made on behalf of the appellants and in the light 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 6,13,008/- Rs.9460 X 12 = 1,13,520/- plus Future Prospectus- 10% i.e., 11,352 = 1,24,872/- minus 4 1/3rd deduction of personal expenses i.e., 41,624/- = 83,248 x 9 multiplier = 7,49,232/- (Changed) 2. Loss of estate 18,000/- 18,000/- 3. Funeral expenses 18,000/- 18,000/- 4. Loss of consortium for wife and two sons (48,000 x 3) 1,44,000/- 1,44,000/- Total Rs. 7,93,008/- 9,29,232/- 9. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs. 7,93,008/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 9,29,232/- . Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs. 7,93,008/- the appellants held entitled for an additional sum of Rs.1,36,224/-. 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 ALLENA ANNAJEE RAO Digitally signed by ALLENA ANNAJEE RAO Date: 2026.09.28 16:58:46 +0530