1 2026:CGHC:14586 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1297 of 2024 1 - Laxmi Kumar Shriwas S/o Shri Narmada Prasad Aged About 50 Years R/o Korba, Purani Basti, Bhandari Chowk, Ward No. 06, Police Station City Kotwali, Tahsil And District Korba Chhattisgarh 2 - Smt. Rukmani Shriwas W/o Laxmi Kumar Shriwas Aged About 45 Years R/o Korba, Purani Basti, Bhandari Chowk, Ward No. 06, Police Station City Kotwali, Tahsil And District Korba Chhattisgarh ... Appellants versus 1 - Islam Ansari (Deleted) As Per Honble Court Order Dated 27-03- 2026 2 - Javed Ansari S/o Islam Ansari Aged About 20 Years R/o Vikas Nagar, Kusmunda, Police Station Kusmunda, District Korba Chhattisgarh (Owner Of The Vehicle Truck No. C.G.-12 A.Y./5120) 3 - Branch Manager The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Branch O;ce 1st Floor, Rama Trade Centre, Old Bus Stand, In Front Of Rajiv Plaza, Police Station Civil Line, Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh (Insurer Of The Vehicle Truck No. C.G.-12 A.Y./5120) ... Respondents Digitally signed by GOPAL SINGH Date: 2026.04.13 16:32:35 +0530 2 For Appellants : Shri Anand Kesharwani, Advocate For Respondent No.3 : Ms. Suchi Ramteke, Advocate on behalf of Shri B.N. Nande, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput Order on Board 27/03/2026 1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short ‘the MV Act’) calls in question validity, correctness and judicial propriety of the award dated 18.1.2024 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) (for short ‘Claims Tribunal’) in Case No.1222 of 2022. 2. By the award impugned, learned Claims Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.13,39,672 on account of death of Kiran Kumar Shriwas in an accident that occurred on 29.5.2022 by rash and negligent driving of the oDending vehicle truck bearing registration No.CG 12 AY 5120 driven by respondent No.1 (now dead), owned by respondent No.2 and insured with respondent No.3. 3. As per the pleadings of the claim application, the deceased was aged about 22 years. He was a barber. He was earning Rs.30,000 per month. He met with the accident due to rash and negligent driving of the oDending vehicle which resulted into his death. Total compensation of Rs.55,00,000 was claimed. 4. Respondents No.1 and 2 and Respondent No.3 denied the averments of the claim application. Respondent No.3/insurance 3 company also pleaded that the accident took place due to negligence of the motorcycle driver, i.e., the deceased and, therefore, there was contributory negligence. Respondent No.1/driver of the oDending vehicle did not have a valid driving licence and complete documents of the oDending vehicle at the time of driving the said vehicle and, therefore, there was breach of terms and conditions of the insurance policy of the oDending vehicle. 5. On the basis of above pleadings, learned Claims Tribunal framed issues and having decided them awarded the above stated compensation. 6. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the deceased was a barber. He was running a salon from where he used to earn around Rs.1,000 per day, i.e., Rs.30,000 per month. Learned Claims Tribunal assessed his monthly income to Rs.8,060 treating him to be an unskilled labour. He submits that the certiEcate issued by the District Salon and Parlour (Gents) Vyavsayik Sangh, Korba Eled as Ex.P12 and the rate-charge (Ex.P13) appended with it would through some light with regard to profession of the deceased. He further submits that the minimum wages for a skilled labour was around Rs.10,500 per month. Thus, suitable enhancement may be made. 7. Opposing the above submission, learned counsel for respondent No.3/insurance company submits that the document Ex.P12 is not proved in accordance with law. No other document is available on record to show the profession and income of the 4 deceased. Learned Claims Tribunal has rightly assessed his monthly income on the basis of minimum wages of an unskilled labour. No interference is warranted and the appeal deserves to be dismissed. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the Claims Tribunal with due care. 9. Of course, as per the pleadings, the deceased was a barber. The statement of AW1 Laxmi Kumar Shriwas also indicates with regard to profession of the deceased. Ex.P12 is the certiEcate issued by the District Salon and Parlour (Gents) Vyavsayik Sangh, Korba. Of course, it is true that the person who has issued the certiEcate has not been examined, but, at the same time, it is to be seen that the Motor Vehicles Act is a proceeding which is summary in nature. Learned Claims Tribunal has to ascertain as to whether the pleadings made by the claimants End some support from any documentary evidence or otherwise. On appreciation of the evidence available on record, this Court can safely infer the profession of the deceased to be a barber. Thus, the deceased could be treated in the category of a skilled labour. Taking into consideration the above stated facts and the evidence available on record, this Court is inclined to assess the monthly income of the deceased to Rs.10,000. 10. In the light of the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in the matters of National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC 680, Sarla Verma and others v. Delhi Transport Corporation and others, (2009) 5 6 SCC 121 and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram and others, (2018) 18 SCC 130, this Court recomputes the compensation in the following manner: Sl.No. Particulars Amount (Rs.) 1 Annual Income (Rs.10,000 x 12 = Rs.1,20,000) 1,20,000 2 Income with Future Prospects (Rs.1,20,000 x 40% = Rs.48,000; Rs.1,20,000 + Rs.48,000 = Rs.1,68,000) 1,68,000 3 Income after Deduction of Personal and Living Expenses of the Deceased (Rs.1,68,000 / 2 = Rs.84,000; Rs.1,68,000 – 84,000 = Rs.84,000) 84,000 4 Loss of Dependency after Application of Multiplier (Rs.84,000 x 18 = Rs.15,12,000) 15,12,000 5 Funeral Expenses (As Awarded by the Learned Claims Tribunal) 16,500 6 Loss of Estate (As Awarded by the Learned Claims Tribunal) 16,500 7 Filial Consortium (Rs.44,000 x 2 = Rs.88,000) (As Awarded by the Learned Claims Tribunal) 88,000 Total Compensation = 16,33,000 (-) Compensation Awarded by the Claims Tribunal = 13,39,672 Enhancement in Compensation = 2,93,328 11. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the appellants/claimants are held to be entitled to an additional amount of compensation of Rs.2,93,328. The enhanced amount of compensation shall carry 6 simple interest @ 6% per annum from the date of Eling of the instant appeal till Enal payment of the enhanced compensation. Respondent No.3/insurance company is directed to deposit the amount of compensation as enhanced by this Court along with the interest within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Out of the enhanced compensation, a sum of Rs.1,25,000 each, total Rs.2,50,000, shall be kept in Exed deposit in the names of appellants No.1 and 2 in a nationalised bank for a period of 3 years. Remaining amount shall be disbursed to appellant No.2. Rest of the impugned award shall remain intact. 12. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part and the impugned award is modiEed to the extent shown above. Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) JUDGE Gopal