Chattisgarh High Court
Smt. Rameshari Kalar vs Luchan @ Laxman Manjhi on 30 March, 2026
1
2026:CGHC:14768
Digitally
NAFR
signed by
HARNEET
HARNEET KAUR
KAUR Date:
2026.04.01
11:07:56
+0530
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MAC No. 762 of 2020
1 - Smt. Rameshari Kalar W/o Hiralal Kalar, Aged About 42
Years R/o Village Parsulidih, Police Station Komakhan, District
Mahasamund Chhattisgarh., District : Mahasamund,
Chhattisgarh
2 - Hiralal Kalar S/o Late Mehttar Lal Kalar Aged About 44 Years
R/o Village Parsulidih, Police Station Komakhan, District
Mahasamund Chhattisgarh., District : Mahasamund,
Chhattisgarh
.. Appellants
versus
1 - Luchan @ Laxman Manjhi S/o Keshav Manjhi, R/o Village
Podjhapar, Post Office Kapani, Police Station Patnagarh District -
Balangir (Odisa) (Driver Of The Offending Vehicle Bearing Reg.
No. A P 31 T D / 2071), District : Balangir, Orissa
2 - Dipendera Singh S/o Nawal Singh Thakur, R/o Ghasiyapara,
Police Station And District - Nuwapada, Odisa. (Owner Of The
Offending Vehicle Bearing Reg. No. A P 31 T D / 2071), District :
Nuapada *, Orissa
2
3 - To The Branch Manager Bajaj Allianz General Insurance
Comapany Limited, Shivmangal Bhawan, Pandri Raipur, District
Raipur Chhattisgarh. (Insurer Of The Offending Vehicle Bearing
Reg. No. A P 31 T D / 2071), District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh
... Respondent(s)
For Appellants : Mr. Arun Kumar Shukla, Advocate For Respondent : Ms. Jasleen Gulati on behalf of No. 3 Mr. Ghanshyam Patel, Advocates SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Judgment On Board 30.03.2026
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 amount of compensation, challenging the impugned award dated 24/12/2019 passed by learned 1st Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mahasamund, District Mahasamund (C.G.) in Claim Case No. H-18/2016, whereby learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs. 4,83,600/- as compensation to the appellants/claimants for the death of Harish Kalar, aged about 17 years.
2. Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants would submit that the Claims Tribunal has erred in assessing the monthly income of the deceased as Rs. 3,000/- whereas it 3 ought to be Rs. 5,787/- as per the minimum wages notification prevalent on the date of the accident. Moreover, the Claims Tribunal has not at all granted any compensation under the head of loss of consortium, whereas it ought to have granted Rs. 44,000/- to each of the appellants/claimants, therefore, the amount of compensation may suitably be enhanced.
3. Learned counsel for respondent No. 3 would support the impugned award and submit that the compensation awarded by learned Claims Tribunal is just and proper and does not warrant any interference by this Court.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection.
5. A careful perusal of the record would show that the Claims Tribunal has assessed the monthly income of the deceased as Rs. 3,000/- whereas it ought to be Rs. 5,787/- as per the minimum wages notification prevelant on the date of the accident and the Claims Tribunal has not at all granted compensation under loss of consortium, however, Rs. 44,000/- ought to have been granted for loss of consortium to each of the appellants/claimants. 4
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 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:-
Sr. Heads Compensation Compensation No awarded by the awarded by this . Tribunal Court
1. Income Rs. 3,000/- x 12 = Rs. 5,787/- x 12 Rs. 36,000/- = Rs. 69,444/-
2. Future Prospect (+) 40% i.e. (+) 40% i.e. Rs. 14,400/- = Rs. 27,778/- = Rs. 50,400/- Rs. 97,222/-
3. Deduction (-) 1/2 = (-) 1/2 = Rs. 25,200/- Rs. 48,611/-
4. Multiplier (x) 18 = (x) 18 = Rs. 4,53,600/- Rs. 8,74,998/-
5. Loss of Estate Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 15,000/-
6. Funeral Expenses Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 15,000/-
7. Loss of Consortium NIL Rs. 44,000/- x 2 = Rs. 88,000/-
Total Rs. 4,83,600/- Rs. 9,92,998/-
7. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs. 4,83,600/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 9,92,998/-. Hence, the 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 5 claimants are held entitled for an additional amount of Rs. 5,09,398/-. Respondent No. 3 is directed to deposit the amount of compensation as enhanced by this Court within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 7% per annum from the date of filing of claim application before the Tribunal i.e. 19/01/2016 till its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact.
8. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above.
Sd/-
(Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Harneet