Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:40862 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 738 of 2022 ASHOK SAHU Digitally signed by ASHOK SAHU Date: 2025.08.14 10:56:59 +0530 1 – Pushpa, W/o. Late Purandash Vaishnav, Aged About 41 Years, R/o. Jevra, Tahsil And Thana Sarangarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) 2 – Jayprakash, S/o. Late Purandash Vaishnav, Aged About 22 Years, R/o. Jevra, Tahsil And Thana Sarangarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) 3 – Jagmohan, S/o. Late Purandash Vaishnav, Aged About 20 Years, R/o. Jevra, Tahsil And Thana Sarangarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) 4 – Ambika, D/o. Purandash Vaishnav, Aged About 17 Years, Minor, Through Legal Guardian Mother Pushpa Vaishnav, Aged About 41 Years, R/o. Jevra, Tahsil And Thana Sarangarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) 5 - Kheera Kumari, D/o. Purandash Vaishnav, Aged About 16 Years, Minor, Through Legal Guardian Mother Pushpa Vaishnav, Aged About 41 Years, R/o. Jevra, Tahsil And Thana Sarangarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) ... Appellants 2 versus 1 - Vikramrama Ram, S/o. Bhadhairam, Aged About 53 Years, R/o. Rehla, Thana Rehla, Vishrampur, District Palamu (J.H.) (Driver Of The Offending Vehicle Damfer CG 13 LA 4170) 2 - Jagdamba Steel And Private Teck Limited, R/o. Sattigudi Chowk Raigarh, Tahsil And District Raigarh (C.G.) (Owner Of The Offending Vehicle Damfer CG 13 LA 4170) 3 - Branch Manager, The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Branch Office 2nd Floor Rama Trade Center, In Front Of Rajeev Plaza. Old Bus Stand Road Bilaspur, Tehsil And Thana Civil Line Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) (Insurer Of The Offending Vehicle Damfer CG 13 LA 4170) ... Respondents For Appellant
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Arjun Lal Singroul, Advocate For Respondent No.3. : Mr. Harishankar Patel, Advocate (Single Bench) Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment on Board 13.08.2025 1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “Act of 1988”) has been preferred by the appellants/claimants seeking enhancement of the amount 3 of compensation, challenging the impugned award dated 20.04.2022 passed by learned 1st Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur in Claim Case No.100/2021, whereby an amount of Rs. 13,00,000/- has been awarded as compensation for the death of Puran Das Vaishnav, who was working as Tent Mistri, aged about 48 years, at the time of incident. 2. Appellants, who are wife, two sons & two daughters of the deceased Puran Das Vaishnav, filed an application under Section 166 of the Act of 1988 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for brevity “Claims Tribunal”) seeking compensation to the tune of Rs. 47,80,000/- pleading therein that on the date of accident, deceased Puran Das Vaishnav was aged about 48 years and was a sole bread earner of the family and on account of his untimely death in the accident, the appellants have suffered economical and psychological difficulties. 3. Learned Claims Tribunal, upon appreciation of pleadings and evidence placed on record by respective parties, held that deceased Puran Das Vaishnav died in the accident arising out of rash & negligent driving of the offending vehicle driven by the respondent No.1, owned by the respondent No.2 and insured by the respondent No.3. Breach of conditions of insurance policy was not 4 found to be proved and after calculating the amount of compensation, the learned Claims Tribunal awarded Rs. 13,00,000/- as total compensation with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of claim application. 4. Mr. Arjun Lal Singroul, learned counsel for the appellants, would submit that learned Claims Tribunal has awarded very meager amount, as the Claims Tribunal erred in assessing income of deceased as Rs.8,000/- per month, which should be Rs. 8,520/- as per Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the office of the Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh. Therefore, the instant appeal be allowed and the amount of compensation awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal may be suitably enhanced. 5. Mr. Harishankar Patel, learned counsel for the insurance company/ respondent No.3 would submit that the appellants have failed to prove the exact income of deceased by producing clinching and admissible piece of evidence, hence, the learned Claims Tribunal is justified in assessing income of deceased on notional basis. The amount of compensation awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal is just and proper, which does not call for any interference. 5 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and gone through the records minutely. 7. Learned Claims Tribunal assessed the monthly income of deceased Puran Das Vaishnav to be Rs.8,000/- per month, however, in the opinion of this Court, as per the Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the office of Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh for unskilled labour, the monthly income of the deceased should be Rs.8,520/- per month, which comes to Rs. 1,02,240/- per annum. 8. 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 Sethi1, Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Ors2 and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors 3 , this Court is computing the compensation as below:- Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court Income as per minimum wages Rs. 8,000 x 12 = Rs. 96,000/- Rs. 8,520 x 12 = Rs. 1,02,240/- 1 2 3