Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 8002 (CHH)

SMT. DEEPIKA SAHU v. MOHD JAVED

MAC/407/2019 · 2026-04-20

Shri Sanjay K Agrawal

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:18063 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 407 of 2019 1 - Smt. Deepika Sahu Wd/o Late Akshay Kumar Sahu Aged About 24 Years R/o In Front Of Nagar Palika, Beergaon, Police Sta琀椀on- Khamtarai, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chha琀�sgarh, Permanent Resident- Village Pairi, Post Sikosa, Police Sta琀椀on- Gundardehi, District- Balod, Chha琀�sgarh., District : Balod, Chha琀�sgarh 2 - Shirsh Kumar Aged About 2.5 Years, S/o Late Akshy Kumar Sahu, Minor Through His Natural Guardian- Mother Smt. Deepika Sahu, Wd/o Late Akshay Kumar Sahu, R/o In Front Of Nagar Palika, Beergaon, Police Sta琀椀on- Khamtarai, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chha琀�sgarh, Permanent Resident- Village Pairi, Post Sikosa, Police Sta琀椀on- Gundardehi, District- Balod, Chha琀�sgarh., District : Balod, Chha琀�sgarh 3 - Smt. Kamla Bai Sahu W/o Shri Chowaram Sahu Aged About 52 Years R/o In Front Of Nagar Palika, Beergaon, Police Sta琀椀on- Khamtarai, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chha琀�sgarh, Permanent Resident- Village Pairi, Post Sikosa, Police Sta琀椀on- Gundardehi, District- Balod, Chha琀�sgarh., District : Balod, Chha琀�sgarh 4 - Shri Chowram Sahu S/o Late Pachkaud Sahu Aged About 56 Years R/o In Front Of Nagar Palika, Beergaon, Police Sta琀椀on- Khamtarai, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chha琀�sgarh, Permanent Resident- Village Pairi, Post Sikosa, Police Sta琀椀on- Gundardehi, District- Balod, Chha琀�sgarh. ... Appellants HARNEET KAUR Digitally signed by HARNEET KAUR Date: 2026.04.22 11:40:02 +0530 2 versus 1 - Mohd Javed S/o Mohd Damdi Musalman R/o Village And Post Dingwar, Police Sta琀椀on- Laur, District- Rewa (Mp) Presently Resided At- C/o Suresh Kumar Sharma, Transport Department, M/s Prakash Industries Limited, Champa Disr琀椀ct. Janjgir-Champa, Chha琀�sgarh............ (Driver Of Trailer No. Cg13 La-4287) 2 - Suresh Kumar Sharma S/o Shri S.R. Sharma Transport Department, M/s Prakash Industries Limited, Champa, District- Janjgir-Champa, Chha琀�sgarh, Other Address- Authorized O昀케cer, M/s Prakash Industries Limited, Dheemarpur Chowk, Raigarh, District- Raipur, Chha琀�sgarh............(Owner Of Trailer No. Cg 13la-4287) 3 - Royal Sundaram Alliance Ggeneral Insurance Company Limited Through The Authorized O昀케cer, Royal Sundaram Alliance General Insurance Company Limited, Near Raj Chambers, Near Mowa School, Besides Over Bridge, Police Sta琀椀on Pandari, Mowa, District- Raipur, Chha琀�sgarh.........(Insurer Of Trailer No. Cg 13la-4287)...........(Non- Applicants), District : Raipur, Chha琀�sgarh ... Respondent(s) For Appellants : Mr. Utkarsh Patel on behalf of Mr. Pushpendra Kumar Patel, Advocates For Respondent No. 3 : Mr. Anupam Dubey, Advocate SB - Hon'ble Shri Jus琀椀ce Sanjay K. Agrawal Order on Board 21.04.2026 1. The instant appeal under Sec琀椀on 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 has been preferred by the appellants/claimants against the 3 impugned award dated 16/10/2018 (Annexure A/1) passed by learned 2nd Addi琀椀onal Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur in Claim Case No. 41/2017 seeking enhancement of compensa琀椀on awarded by the Claims Tribunal for the death of Akshay Kumar Sahu, aged about 28 years. 2. Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants would submit that the Claims Tribunal has assessed the monthly income of the deceased as Rs. 6,000/-, however, as per the minimum wage no琀椀昀椀ca琀椀on prevailing at that 琀椀me, the monthly income of the deceased should be Rs. 6,206/-. Moreover, the Claims Tribunal has only awarded Rs. 40,000/- under loss of consor琀椀um, whereas it ought to have awarded Rs. 48,000/- x 4 = Rs. 1,92,000/- under loss of consor琀椀um and Rs. 18,000/- each ought to have been awarded for loss of estate and funeral expenses instead of Rs. 15,000/- each, therefore, the amount of compensa琀椀on awarded by the Claims Tribunal is liable to be enhanced. 3. Learned counsel for respondent No. 3/Insurance Company would support the impugned award and submit that the compensa琀椀on awarded by the Claims Tribunal is just and proper and does not warrant any interference by this Court. 4 4. I have heard learned counsel for the par琀椀es, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the record with utmost circumspec琀椀on. 5. A careful perusal of the award would show that as per the minimum wage no琀椀昀椀ca琀椀on prevailing at that 琀椀me, the monthly income of the deceased should be Rs. 6,206/- and Rs. 48,000/- ought to be granted for loss of consor琀椀um to each of the four claimants and further, Rs. 18,000/- each ought to be granted for loss of estate and funeral expenses. 6. In view of the aforesaid, compensa琀椀on is calculated below :- Heads of Compensa琀椀on Compensa琀椀on awarded by the Tribunal Compensa琀椀on awarded by this Court Income Rs. 6,000/- x 12 = Rs. 72,000/- Rs. 6,206/- x 12 = Rs. 74,472/- Future Prospect (+) 40% i.e. Rs. 28,800/- = Rs. 1,00,800/- (+) 40% i.e. Rs. 29,788/- = Rs. 1,04,260/- Deduc琀椀on towards Personal Expenses (-) ¼ i.e. Rs. 25,200/- = Rs. 75,600/- (-) ¼ i.e. Rs. 26,065/- = Rs. 78,195/- Mul琀椀plier (x) 17 = Rs. 12,85,200/- (x) 17 = Rs. 13,29,315/- Loss of Consor琀椀um Rs. 40,000/- Rs. 48,000/- x 4 = Rs. 1,92,000/- Funeral Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 18,000/- 5 Expenses Loss of Estate Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 18,000/- Total Rs. 13,55,200/- Rs. 15,57,315/- 7. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensa琀椀on of Rs. 13,55,200/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 15,57,315/-. Hence, the appellants/claimants are held en琀椀tled for an addi琀椀onal compensa琀椀on of Rs. 2,02,115/-. Respondent No. 3 is directed to deposit the amount of compensa琀椀on as enhanced by this Court within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The addi琀椀onal amount of compensa琀椀on shall carry interest @ 9% per annum from the date of 昀椀ling of claim applica琀椀on before the Tribunal i.e. 16/10/2018 琀椀ll its realiza琀椀on. Rest of the condi琀椀ons of the impugned award shall remain intact. 8. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the impugned award is modi昀椀ed to the extent as indicated herein-above. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Harneet