High Court of Chhattisgarh
Case Details
HIFZURRAHMAN ANSARI Digitally signed by HIFZURRAHMAN ANSARI Date: 2025.09.11 10:46:42 +0530 1 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 3 of 2020 NAFR 1 - Smt. Sunita Markam S/o Late Bhanu Ram Markam Aged About 26 Years R/o Village Padampur, Tahsil Nagari , District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh., District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh 2 - Koushal Markam S/o Late Bhanu Ram Markam Aged About 6 Years Minor Through Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Sunita Markam Wife Of Late Bhanu Ram Markam, R/o Village Padampur, Tahsil Nagari , District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh., District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh
Legal Reasoning
3 - Ku. Daneshwari Markam D/o Late Bhanu Ram Markam Aged About 4 Years Through Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Sunita Markam Wife Of Late Bhanu Ram Markam , R/o Village Padampur, Tahsil Nagari , District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh., District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh 4 - Ku Paridhi Markam D/o Late Bhanu Ram Markam Aged About 11 Years Through Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Sunita Markam Wife Of Late Bhanu Ram Markam , R/o Village Padampur, Tahsil Nagari , District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh., District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh ... Appellants versus 1 - Pintu Markam S/o Subhau Ram Markam Aged About 21 Years R/o Shivnapali, Post Hatbhandari, Tahsil Raighar, District Navrangpur Odisha ...(Driver), District : Nabarangapur Orissa *, 2 - Bishnu Kumar Sahu S/o Kunjal Sahu Aged About 38 Years R/o Village Jhatiyarpara, Post Hatbhandi, Tahsil Raigarh, District Navrangpur Odisha ...(Owner), District : Nabarangapur Orissa *, 3 - National Insurance Company Limited Branch Officer, Through Branch Manager, Second Floor, Mobin Mahal G.E. Road, Raipur, Tahsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh....(Insurer), District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Appellants : Mr. Praveen Dhurandhar, Advocate For Respondent No. 3 : Mr. G. V. Kutumba Rao, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput, Order on Board 03.09.2025 2 1) This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short MV Act) has been filed by the appellants/claimants, being aggrieved by the award dated 16.10.2019 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dhamtari (C.G.) (for short ‘learned Tribunal’) in Claim Case No. 56/2019. 2) By the impugned award, the learned Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs. 9,77,200/- to the appellants/claimants, on account of the death of deceased/ Bhanu Ram Markam in an accident that took place on 26.12.2018 by rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle (Bolero) bearing Registration No. OR-24-B-2160 by respondent No.1, owned by respondent No.2 and insured with respondent No.3/Insurance company. As a result of the said accident, the deceased died on the spot. 3) As per the pleadings, the deceased/ Bhanu Ram Markam was aged about 31 years and was working as Mason and earning a monthly income of Rs. 15,000/-. The appellants/claimants were dependent upon the income of the deceased. 4) The respondent No. 1 & 2 filed their written statement and denied the averments of the fact. Respondent No.3 /Insurance company in usual course, denied the averments of the claim application and pleaded that the driver of the offending vehicle did not have valid and effective driving licence and there is a violation of terms and conditions of insurance policy. 5) On the basis of the above pleadings, the learned Tribunal has framed 6 issues and after appreciating the material available on record decided the same in favour of the appellants/claimants and awarded above stated compensation. 6) Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants submits that the amount of compensation is on the lower side. Hence, suitable enhancement may be made by this Court. 3 7) Learned counsels for the respondent No.3 supports the award and submits that in view of evidence available on record and findings of the learned Tribunal is justified and just compensation has been awarded. 8) I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions and perused the records. 9) Considering the evidence available on record; age of the deceased; date of accident; nature of job; this Court is of the view that Rs. 11,000/- can be safely taken as monthly income of the deceased. 10) In light of the above and taking guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of National Insurance Company Ltd. V. Pranay Sethi and others; (2017) 16 SCC 680, Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Ors; (2009) 6 SCC 121 and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors; (2018) 18 SCC 130, this Court is recomputing the compensation as below:- S.N Particular Awarded by this Court Monthly Income of the deceased Future Prospect 40% Net Income Yearly income Personal expenditure 1/4 Yearly dependency 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Multiplier of 16 applied to assess 11,000/- 11,000 X40%=4,400/- 11,000+4,400=15,400/- 15,400 X12=1,84,800/- 1,84,800/4= 46,200/- 1,84,800-46,200=1,38,600/- 1,38,600 X16= 22,17,600/- loss of dependency Funeral Expenses Loss of estate 8. 9. 15,000/- 15,000/- 10. Spousal and Parental consortium 01,60,000/- (40,000/- each to A-1 to Total compensation A-4) Rs. 24,07,600/- 11) For the forgoing reasons, the appeal is allowed in part. The amount of compensation of Rs.09,77,200/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 4 24,07,600/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs. 09,77,200/-, the appellants/claimants are held entitled for an additional amount of Rs. 14,30,400/-. The additional amount shall carry interest @6% per anuum from the date of appeal i.e. 19.12.2019. The impugned award stands modified to the above extent. 12) The respondent No. 3–Insurance Company is directed to deposit the amount of compensation, as enhanced by this Court, within a period of sixty (60) days from today. Upon such deposit being made, a sum of Rs. 4,00,000/- shall be invested in the name of appellant No. 1-Smt. Sunita Markam, in the form of a Fixed Deposit Receipt (FDR) in any Nationalized Bank for a period of two years. A sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- each shall be invested in the names of appellants No. 2 to 4 in FDRs in any Nationalized Bank until they attain the age of majority. The balance amount shall be released to appellant No. 1-Smt. Sunita Markam, by way of bank transfer/account payee cheque. 13) Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed. Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge H.Ansari