Smt. Thamesh Yadav v. Devnarayan Bhale

1 - Smt. Thamesh Yadav W/o Late Vijay Yadav Aged About 26 Years R/o Village And Post Kachana, Police Station Bhakhara, District - Dhamtarari (C.G.) (Claimants ) 2 - Kaliram Yadav S/o Nohar Yadav (Died) (Lrs Of Deceased Already On Record ) R/o Village and Post Kachana, Police Station Bhakhara, District - Dhamtarari (C.G.) 3 - Sohdra Bai W/o Kaliram Yadav Aged About 58 Years R/o Village And Post Kachana, Police Station Bhakhara, District - Dhamtarari (C.G.) ... Appellants versus 1 - Devnarayan Bhale S/o Rampratap Bhale Aged About 52 Years R/o Rajeev Chowk Ward No. 02 Patan Tahsil And Police Station Patan District - Drug (C.G.) (Driver Of Offending Vehicle No. C.G. -04/MJ / 5761). 2 - Shubham Bhale S/o Sanad Kumar Bhale Aged About 50 Years R/o Rajeev Chowk Ward No. 02 Patan Tahsil And Police Station Patan District - Drug (C.G.) (Owner Of Offending Vehicle No. C.G. -04/MJ / 5761 ), 3 - Branch Manager Megma, H.D.I. General Insurance Company Limited Block - A First Floor Pujari Chamber, Nearby Pachpedi Chowk Raipur Tahsil And District - Raipur (C.G.) (Insurer Of Offending Vehicle No. C.G. -04/MJ / 5761 ) ... Respondents For the appellants : Mr. Anil Gulati, Advocate For Respondents : …... 2 Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judgment on Board 23/07/2026

#1. This appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “MV Act”) has been filed seeking enhancement of compensation, challenging the impugned award dated 25.04.2025 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kurud, District Dhamtari in Claim Case No. 87/2024 whereby a total compensation of Rs.20,24,096/- has been awarded for the death of deceased.

#2. Brief facts of the case are that the deceased Vijay Yadav died on the spot in a motor accident took place on 30.04.2024 due to rash and negligent driving of respondent no.1. Appellant no.1 is widow and appellants 2 & 3 are parents of deceased. They being legal heirs filed claim application seeking a total compensation of Rs. 45 lakhs.

#3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the income taken by the Tribunal and the amounts granted under the conventional heads are on lower side, therefore, just compensation has not been granted. Therefore, the award may suitably be enhanced.

#4. The claimants pleaded that the deceased was earning Rs.700-800/ per day by working as Headmistry. In absence of any documentary evidence and looking to the nature of job, the learned claims Tribunal took the income of deceased to be Rs. 10,380/- which cannot be said to be on lower side.

#5. The age of deceased was found to be 31 years. Considering the age and number of dependents as also in the light of the decisions of the Supreme Court rendered in National Insurance Company Ltd. Versus Pranay Sethi (2017) 16 SCC 680; Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation (2009) 6 SCC 121 and 3 Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. Versus Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram (2018) 18 SCC 130 the Tribunal has rightly added 40% future prospects, deducted 1/3rd towards personal expenses and applied multiplier 16. Thus the total loss of dependency was worked out to Rs. 18,60,096/-.

#6. Further more, under other conventional heads, i.e., funeral expenses Rs.18000/-; loss of estate Rs.18000/-; loss of consortium to wife Rs.48,000/- and loss of filial consortium for the parents Rs.80,000/ (40,000 x 2) have been granted. Thus a total compensation of Rs. 20,24,096/- has been awarded for the death of deceased in favour of the appellants with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of application till its realisation.

#7. Since the the award passed by the Tribunal is in conformity with the settled principles laid down by the Supreme Court, it cannot be said that just compensation has not been awarded. Hence, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the award passed by the tribunal warranting interference in this appeal. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. Sd/- Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Judge Rao