1 2026:CGHC:8682 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1271 of 2022 1 - Smt. Ranjana Bharti W/o Late Shri Hiralal Bharti Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Devrikhurd, P. S. Torwa, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh (Claimant) 2 - Ku. Indubala D/o Late Shri Hiralal Bharti Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Devrikhurd, P. S. Torwa, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh (Claimant) 3 - Avishek Bharti S/o Late Shri Hiralal Bharti Aged About 23 Years R/o Village Devrikhurd, P. S. Torwa, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh (Claimant) 4 - Ku. Muskan Bharti D/o Late Shri Hiralal Bharti Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Devrikhurd, P. S. Torwa, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh (Claimant) ... Appellants Versus 1 - Agam Das S/o Krishna Lal Jangde Aged About 33 Years R/o Village Sendri, P. S. Koni, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh (Owner And Driver Of The Offending Vehicle Highwa Truck Bearing Registration No. C. G.-10-R/1056) 2 - Head Manager, Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd. Address-E-8, Epipriico Industrial Area, Sitapura, Jaipur Rajasthan 302022. Second Address Branch Manager, Plot No. 01, 5th Floor, Maruti Heights Near Sky Auto Mobile G. E. Road, Raipur, Tahsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh (Insurer Of The Offending Vehicle Highwa Truck Bearing Registration No. C. G.-10-R/1056) ... Respondents For Appellants/Claimants : Mrs. Renu Kochar, Advocate For Respondents No. 2 / Insurance Company : Mr. Swapnil Thawaney, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. P.R. Patanker, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment on Board 18/02/2026 1. The appellants/claimants have filed this appeal for enhancement of compensation assailing the judgment and award passed by the Xth learned Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) in Claim Case No. 1372/2021 dated 06.08.2022, whereby learned Claims Tribunal has granted compensation to the tune of Rs.17,92,500/- with interest @ 9% per annum on account of death of Hiralal Bharti. Digitally signed by RAMESH KUMAR VATTI Date: 2026.02.19 13:56:08 +0530 2 2. The facts, in brief, are that on 11.04.2021 Hiralal Bharti was going towards Bilaspur on Scooty bearing registration No. CG-11 / AA-5612 and when he reached at Godadih turn, the driver of the offending Hyva bearing registration No. CG-10 / R-1056 by driving it rashly and negligently, dashed the Scooty of Hiralal, resultantly, he sustained injuries and succumbed to death. 3. The claimants who are widow and 03 major children filed claim case under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, wherein they pleaded that at the time of accident, age of deceased- Hiralal was 45 years and earning Rs.30,000/- per month. They claimed a sum of Rs.72,70,000/-. 4. The Insurance Company filed reply and denied the averments made in the claim petition. 5. The learned Claims Tribunal framed issues, parties led evidence and thereafter award was passed. 6. Mrs. Renu Kochar, learned counsel appearing for the appellants/claimants would submit the learned Claims Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased Rs.10,000/- per month which is at lower side. She would submit that the learned Claims Tribunal has considered deceased semi-skilled labour, but failed to assess his income according to minimum wages matrix admissible to semi-skilled labourer. She would submit that on conventional heads, the learned Claims Tribunal has granted meager amount. She would pray to enhance the compensation accordingly. 7. On the other hand, Mr. Swapnil Thawaney, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 2/Insurance Company would oppose. Mr. Thawaney would submit that the learned Claims Tribunal has granted 3 just and proper compensation. He would contend that the appeal deserves to be dismissed. 8. I have heard, learned counsel for the parties and perused the records of the learned Claims Tribunal with utmost circumspection. 9. The claimants pleaded that the deceased was earning Rs.30,000/- per month. In support of their contention, the claimants could not adduce any documentary evidence. 10. AW-1 – Smt. Ranjana Bharti stated on affidavit that the deceased was earning Rs.30,000/- per month, but in cross-examination, she admitted that she could not adduce documentary evidence in this regard. AW-2 – Avishek Bharti also admitted the fact that he could not adduce evidence to prove the income of the deceased. 11. The learned Claims Tribunal treated the deceased semi-skilled labour and assessed his income Rs.10,000/- per month applying the minimum wages matrix. The finding recorded by the learned Claims Tribunal appears to be proper. The learned Claims Tribunal deducted 1/4th for personal and living expenses of the deceased; applied multiplier of 14 looking to the age of the deceased 45 years; and further granted 25% of income on future prospects and also granted compensation for loss of consortium; loss of estate and funeral expenses. Thus, in my opinion, the learned Claims Tribunal has granted just and proper compensation to the claimants and there is no scope of interference with the judgment and award dated 06.08.2022 passed by the learned Claims Tribunal. Accordingly, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge vatti