1 2026:CGHC:19182 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 613 of 2020 1 - Smt. Mandeshwari Mandloi W/o Late Basant Kumar Mandloi Aged About 40 Years R/o Darripara, Ratanpur, Post Office Ratanpur, Tahsil Kota, Police Station Ratanpur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Dhanaram Mandloi S/o Sukhdev Prasad Aged About 65 Years R/o Darripara, Ratanpur, Post Office Ratanpur, Tahsil Kota, Police Station Ratanpur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Smt. Shanti Devi Mandloi W/o Dhanaram Mandloi Aged About 62 Years R/o Darripara, Ratanpur, Post Office Ratanpur, Tahsil Kota, Police Station Ratanpur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Ku. Ayushi Mandloi D/o Late Basant Kumar Mandloi Aged About 17 Years Minor Through Legal Natural Guardian Mother Namely Smt. Mandeshwari Mandloi W/o Late Basant Kumar Mandloi, R/o Darripara, Ratanpur, Post Office Ratanpur, Tahsil Kota, Police Station Ratanpur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Ku. Aakriti Mandloi D/o Basant Kumar Mandloi Aged About 15 Years Minor Through Legal Natural Guardian Mother Namely Smt. Mandeshwari Mandloi W/o Late Basant Kumar Mandloi, R/o Darripara, Ratanpur, Post Office Ratanpur, Tahsil Kota, Police Station Ratanpur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 6 - Ku. Aditi Mandloi D/o Late Basant Kumar Mandloi Aged About 12 Years Minor Through Legal Natural Guardian Mother Namely Smt. Mandeshwari Mandloi W/o Late Basant Kumar Mandloi, R/o Darripara, Ratanpur, Post Office Ratanpur, Tahsil Kota, Police Station Ratanpur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellants versus 1 - Satendra Singh Gond S/o Shiv Mangal Singh Gond Aged About 24 Years Occupation Driver, R/o Village Basoda, Post Office Jarha, Police Station Baithhan, District Singrouli, Madhya Pradesh. Pin No. 486885 (Driver Of Offending Vehicle Truck Bearing Registration No. C.G.29a 9002), District : Singhrouli, Madhya Pradesh 2 - Shiv Shankar Singh S/o Satyendra Kumar Singh Aged About 25 Years KRISHNA KUMAR BARVE Digitally signed by KRISHNA KUMAR BARVE Date: 2026.04.25 19:24:18 +0530 2 Occupation Transporter, R/o Quarter No. 544, Departmental Colony, Vishrampur, Police Station Vishrampur, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh. (Owner Of Offending Vehicle Truck Bearing Registration No. C.G.29 A 9002), District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Shree Ram General Insurance Company Ltd. Head Office-E-8 Epip Riico Industrial Area Sitapura, Jaipur Rajasthan 302022 (India) Through Branch Manager, Shree Ram General Insurance Company Ltd. Branch Office 4th Floor Maruti Heights G.E. Road, Raipur, Tahsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh (Insurer Of Offending Vehicle Truck Bearing Registration No. C.G.29 A 9002), District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Appellants : Mr. Nitansh Kumar Jaiswal, Advocate. For Respondent No.3 : Mr. Ashutosh Rathore, Advocate. (Single Bench) Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 25/04/2026 1. The appellants/claimants have preferred this Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short ‘the Act, 1988’) calling in question the legality, validity and correctness of the award dated 25.11.2019 passed by the 5th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur (for short ‘the Claims Tribunal’) in Claim Case No.269/2019 by which liability to pay compensation of Rs.10,86,910/- has been fastened on the respondents. In the present Appeal, the appellants/claimants have prayed for enhancement of the compensation amount. 2. Mr. Nitansh Kumar Jaiswal, learned counsel for the appellants /claimants would submit that the Claims Tribunal was not justified in assessing the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.6,000/- and as per minimum wages at the relevant point of time, his 3 monthly income should have been assessed at Rs.8,140/-. Learned counsel for the appellants further submits that towards loss of consortium, funeral expenses, loss of estate, etc. the Claims Tribunal has not awarded proper compensation. As such, the impugned award may be modified accordingly. 3. On the other hand, Mr. Ashutosh Rathore, learned counsel for respondent No.3 would support the impugned award. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection. 5. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and after going through the record, this Court is of the opinion that the Claims Tribunal has wrongly assessed the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.6,000/- per month, whereas as per the minimum wages at the relevant point of time, monthly income of the deceased should have been assessed at Rs.8,140/-. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also in view of the minimum wages at the relevant point of time and that present is a death case, it would be appropriate to enhance award amount by taking monthly income of the deceased at Rs.8,140/-. As such, the claimants will be entitled for the following compensation as computed by this Court:- Sr. No. Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1. Income (unskilled Rs.6,000/-, Rs.8,140/- (as 4 labour) Rs.6,000/- x 12 = Rs.72,000/- per minimum wages) x 12 = Rs.97,680/- 2. Future prospects (+) 25% i.e. Rs.90,000/- (+) 25% i.e. Rs.1,22,100/- 3. Personal expenses (-) 1/4th i.e. Rs.67,500/- (-) 1/4th i.e. Rs.91,575/- 4. Multiplier 14, i.e. Rs.9,45,000/- 14, i.e. Rs.12,82,050/- 5. Loss of consortium (+) Rs.40,000/- Rs.2,00,000/- 6. Funeral expenses (+) Rs.10,000/- Rs.15,000/- 7. Loss of estate (+) Rs.10,000/- Rs.15,000/- 8. Medical expenses (+) Rs.81,910/- Rs.81,910/- Total Rs.10,86,910/- Rs.15,93,960/- 6. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of ₹10,86,910/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to ₹15,93,960/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of ₹10,86,910/-, the claimants are held to be entitled to an additional amount of ₹5,07,050/-. The respondents are directed to deposit the amount of compensation within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of claim application before the Tribunal till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. 7. With the aforesaid modifications, the Appeal is disposed of. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Barve