1 2026:CGHC:13752 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1036 of 2024 1 - Kumari Anita Netam D/o Shyamlal Netam Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Dhanora, Post Singpur, Police Station Dugali, Tahsil Magarlod, District Dhamtari (C.G.). 2 - Shyamlal Netam S/o Jagguram Netam Aged About 44 Years R/o Village Dhanora, Post Singpur, Police Station Dugali, Tahsil Magarlod, District Dhamtari (C.G.). ... Appellants versus 1 - Mehrab Khan S/o Khajuddin @ Khaju Aged About 45 Years R/o Baniyapara, Mahant Ghasidas Ward, Dhamtari, Tahsil And District Dhamtari (C.G.) (Driver Of Offending Tractor Number Cg 05/ad-1724). 2 - Shyamlal Markam S/o Bishal Ram Markam Aged About 60 Years R/o Village Gattasilli, Police Station Dugali, District Dhamtari (C.G.) (Owner Of Offending Tractor Number Cg 05/ad-1724). 3 - Tata A.I.G. General Insurance Company Limited First Floor, Balfort Ozon, Fafadeeh Chowk, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) (Insurer Of Offending Tractor Number Cg 05/ad-1724). ... Respondents For Appellants : Mr. Anil Gulati, Advocate For Res Nos. 1 & 2 : Mr. Sourabh Sharma and Mr. Rahul Singh Thakur, Advocates For Res. No. 3 : Mr. Shobhit Kostha, Advocate AMITA DUBEY Digitally signed by AMITA DUBEY Date: 2026.04.01 11:59:57 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput, Order on Board 23.03.2026 1) This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short MV Act) has been filed by the appellants/claimants, being aggrieved by the award dated 06.02.2024 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kurud District- Dhamtari (C.G.) in Claim Case No. 03/2023. 2) By the impugned award, the learned Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs. 15,48,577/- to the appellants/claimants, on account of the death of deceased Sanjay Kumar Netam in an accident that took place on 14.09.2022 by rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle (Tractor) bearing Registration No. CG-05AD/1724 driven by driver/respondent No.1- Mehrab Khan, Owned by respondent No. 2/Shyamlal Markam, insured with the respondent No. 3/ Tata A.I.G. General Insurance Company Limited. As a result of the said accident, the deceased/ Sanjay Kumar Netam sustained severe injuries, due to which he died. 3) As per the pleadings, the deceased/ Sanjay Kumar Netam was aged about 22 years and was working as a Computer Operator and was earning Rs. 10,000/- per months. The appellants/claimants were dependent upon the income of the deceased. 4) Respondent No. 1 & 2/Driver and owner field their written statement. Respondent No.3/Insurance company in usual course, denied the averments of the claim application and pleaded that the driver of the offending vehicle did not have valid and effective driving licence and there is a violation of terms and conditions of insurance policy. 5) On the basis of the above pleadings, the learned Tribunal has framed 7 issues and after appreciating the material available on record decided the same in favour of the appellants/claimants and awarded above stated compensation. 6) Mr. Gulati, learned counsel for the appellants/claimants submits that the deceased/ Sanjay Kumar Netam was aged about 22 years and was a Computer Operator and was earning Rs. 10,000/-, whereas the learned Tribunal assessed the monthly income of the deceased/ Sanjay Kumar 3 Netam to Rs. 9,000/-. Alternatively, he submits that looking to the date of accident, atleast minimum wages should have been taken for assessment of compensation and amount on other heads is also on the lower side. Hence, suitable enhancement may be made by this Court. 7) Mr. Koshta, learned counsel for the respondent No.3. supports the award and submits that in view of evidence available on record and findings of the learned Tribunal is justified and just compensation has been awarded. 8) I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions and perused the records. 9) Considering the evidence available on record; number of dependents; age of the deceased; date of accident; nature of job & minimum wages prevailing at that time this Court is of the view that Rs. 10,000/- can be safely taken as income of the deceased. 10) In light of the above and taking guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of National Insurance Company Ltd. V. Pranay Sethi and others; (2017) 16 SCC 680, Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Ors; (2009) 6 SCC 121 and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors; (2018) 18 SCC 130, this Court is recomputing the compensation as below:- S.N Particular Awarded by this Court 1. Income of the deceased 10,00012= 1,20,000 2. Future Prospects @ 40% 48,000/- 3. Total Income 1,68,000/- 5. Personal expenditure (1/2) 1,68,000/2= 84,000/- 6. Multiplier of 18 applied to assess total loss of dependency 84,000X18= 15,12,000/- 7. Funeral Expenses 16,500/- 8. Loss of estate 16,500/- 9. Parental Consortium 80,0000/- to the father of the deceased Total compensation 16,25,000/- 11) For the forgoing reasons, the appeal is allowed in part. The amount of compensation of Rs. 15,48,577/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 16,25,000/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs. 15,48,577/-, the appellants/claimants are held entitled for an additional amount of Rs. 76,423/-. the 4 additional amount shall carry interest @6% per anuum from the date of appeal i.e. 22.05.2024. The impugned award stands modified to the above extent. 12) The insurance company is directed to deposit the entire amount of compensation as awarded by learned Tribunal and enhanced by this Court within a period of 60 days from today, on such deposit is being made. The learned Tribunal will pass appropriate order with regard to disbursement and investment of the compensation amongst the appellants/claimants. 13) Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed. Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge Ami