Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 MAC No. 426 of 2022 ANKIT KUMAR SINGH Digitally signed by ANKIT KUMAR SINGH Date: 2025.08.19 17:56:35 +0530 2025:CGHC:41538 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 426 of 2022 1. Sudha Bai Yadaw Wd/o Late Dhola Lal @ Manoj Yadaw Aged About 42 Years; 2. Shwetayadaw D/o Late Dhola Lal @ Manoj Yadaw Aged About 18 Years; 3. Minor Gaurav Yadaw S/o Late Dhola Lal @ Manoj Yadaw Aged About 16 Years; 4. Minor Neeraj Yadaw S/o Late Dhola Lal @ Manoj Yadaw Aged About 14 Years; Appellants No.3 & 4 are minor through the Mother (Legal Guardian) Sudha Bai Yadaw Appellant No. 01
Legal Reasoning
5. Smt. Sushila Yadaw W/o Bihari Yadaw Aged About 65 Years; All are R/o Village- Bhaismudi, Police Station Kharora, District Raipur (C.G.); at present – Ward No. - 06 Stadium Chowk, Palari Tahsil Palari District Balodabazar Bhatapara (C.G.). ... Appellants/Claimants versus 1. Nandlal Varma S/o Late Tarachand Verma, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Village Musawadeeh, Post Office Jara, District Balodabazar, Bhatapara (C.G.) (Driver Of The Vehicle Tractor No. CG 04 MT 8386) 2 MAC No. 426 of 2022 2. Mukesh Kumar Varma S/o Chhedulal Varma, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Village - Bhaismudi, Police Station Kharora, District - Raipur (C.G.) (Owner Of The Vehicle Tractor No. CG 04 MT 8386) 3. IFFCO TOKYO General Insurance Company Limited, Address- 2nd Floor, M.M. Silver Plaza, Shop No. - 205, Near Mineral Office, Mahaveer Nagar, Ring Road No. 01, Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) (Insurer Of The Vehicle Tractor No. CG 04 MT 8386) ... Respondents For Appellant :- Mr. Anand Kesharwani, Advocate. For Respondent No.3 :- Mr. P.R. Patankar, Advocate. SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment On Board 18.08.2025 1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “Act of 1988”) has been preferred by the appellants seeking enhancement in the amount of compensation, challenging the impugned award dated 08.10.2021 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh (for short “Claims Tribunal”) in Claim Case No. 37/2020, whereby learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of ₹13,30,000/- as compensation along with interest for death of Dhola Lal @ Manoj Yadaw who was a electrician and agricultural worker, aged about 45 years at the time of incident. The 3 MAC No. 426 of 2022 claimants/appellants herein are the wife, daughter and sons, respectively, of the deceased. 2. Mr. Anand Kesharwani, learned counsel for the appellants, would submit that learned Claims Tribunal has erred in awarding less amount of compensation in the facts of the case. The Claims Tribunal erred in assessing income of deceased as ₹8,000/- per month which should be ₹8,860/- as per Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the office of the Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh for the labour. It is further contended that has erred in awarding compensation under the head of ‘consortium’, as well as under the heads of ‘estate’ and ‘funeral expenses’, which is required to be enhanced and, therefore, the instant appeal be allowed and the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal may suitably be enhanced. 3. Mr. P.R. Patankar, learned counsel for the respondent No.3, would submit that the appellants have failed to prove nature of occupation and income of deceased by producing clinching and admissible piece of evidence, hence, the Tribunal is justified in assessing income of deceased on notional basis. The amount of compensation awarded by the 4 MAC No. 426 of 2022 Claims Tribunal is just and proper which does not call for any interference. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and gone through the records minutely. 5. Learned Claims Tribunal assessed the monthly income of deceased Shubham Sahu to be ₹8,000/-, however, in the opinion of this Court, as per the Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the office of Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh for labour, the monthly income of the deceased should be ₹8,860/- (as per minimum wages prescribed at relevant time) and ₹1,06,320/- per annum. Moreover, a sum of ₹40,000/- has been awarded by the Claims Tribunal under the ‘head of consortium’ and ₹15,000/- each under the heads of ‘estate’ and ‘funeral expenses’ to the claimants/appellants is liable to be enhanced. 6. Thus, in light of the aforesaid discussion and in light of the judgments of the Supreme Court rendered in the matters of National Insurance Company Ltd. V. Pranay Sethi 1, Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 5 MAC No. 426 of 2022 Corporation & Ors2 and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors 3 , this Court is computing the compensation as below:- Sr. Heads Compensation Compensation No. awarded by the awarded by this Tribunal Court 1. Income ₹ 8,000 x 12 = ₹ ₹ 8,860 x 12 = 96,000/- ₹1,06,320/- 2. Future (+) 25% i.e. ₹ 24,000/-; (+) 25% i.e. ₹26,580/-; Prospect total yearly income ₹ total income = ₹ 96,000 + 24,000= 1,06,320 + 26,580 = ₹1,20,000/- ₹1,32,900/- 3. Deduction (-) ¼ = ₹ 30,000/- (-) ¼ = ₹ 33,225/- ₹ 1,20,000 - 30,000 = ₹ ₹ 1,32,900 - 33,225 = 90,000/- (total income) ₹99,675/- (total income) 4. Multiplier (x) 14 = ₹ 12,60,000/- (x) 14 = ₹ 13,95,450/- 5. Loss of ₹ 15,000/- ₹ 16,500/- Estate 6. Funeral ₹ 15,000/- ₹ 16,500/- Expenses 7. Loss of ₹ 40,000/- ₹44,000 x 5 = Consortium ₹2,20,000/- Total ₹ 13,30,000/- ₹ 16,48,450/- 7. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of ₹13,30,000/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to ₹16,48,450/-. Hence, after