Chattisgarh High Court

Smt. Ramli Baghel vs Sudarram Kashyap on 8 April, 2025

                                    1


                          Digitally signed by
                          SHUBHAM SINGH
                          RAGHUVANSHI
                          Date: 2025.04.09
                          18:13:40 +0530


                                                2025:CGHC:16482
                                                             NAFR

         HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR


                       MAC No. 1543 of 2019

1 - Smt. Ramli Baghel W/o Late Jayman Baghel Aged About 33 Years
Caste Maahra, R/o Village Mutanpal, Police Station Kodenar, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh


2 - Smt. Paaru @ Paro W/o Late Jayman Baghel Aged About 22 Years
Caste Maahra, R/o Village Mutanpal, Police Station Kodenar, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh


3 - Ku. Anjali D/o Late Jayman Baghel Aged About 16 Years Minor
Through Mother / Guardian Appellant No. 1, R/o Village Mutanpal,
Police Station Kodenar, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh


4 - Sameer Kumar Baghel S/o Late Jayman Baghel Aged About 12
Years Minor Through Mother / Guardian Appellant No. 1, R/o Village
Mutanpal, Police Station Kodenar, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh


5 - Ku. Savita D/o Late Jayman Baghel Aged About 9 Years Minor
Through Mother / Guardian Appellant No. 1, R/o Village Mutanpal,
Police Station Kodenar, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh


6 - Ku. Sandhya D/o Late Jayman Baghel Aged About 9 Years Minor
Through Mother / Guardian Appellant No. 2, R/o Village Mutanpal,
Police Station Kodenar, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh
7 - Laxman Baghel S/o Late Chaitan Aged About 58 Years Caste
Maahra, R/o Village Mutanpal, Police Station Kodenar, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh


8 - Smt. Soni W/o Laxman Aged About 55 Years Caste Maahra, R/o
                                        2

Village    Mutanpal,   Police     Station    Kodenar,    District   Bastar,
Chhattisgarh


9 - Ku. Deepa Baghel D/o Laxman Baghel Aged About 29 Years Caste
Maahra, R/o Village Mutanpal, Police Station Kodenar, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh


10 - Ku. Madhuri Baghel D/o Laxman Baghel Aged About 23 Years
Caste Maahra, R/o Village Mutanpal, Police Station Kodenar, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh


11 - Ku. Sushila Baghel D/o Laxman Baghel Aged About 18 Years
Caste Maahra, R/o Village Mutanpal, Police Station Kodenar, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh
                                                            ... Appellants
                                   versus


1 - Sudarram Kashyap Samdu Aged About 38 Years R/o Village
Aanjar     Kosapara,   Police    Station    Maardum,     District   Bastar,
Chhattisgarh


2   - Satyendrasingh Kushwaha S/o Late Narsingh Pal Singh
Kushwaha Kushwaha Bada, New Bus Stand, Jagdalpur, District
Bastar, Chhattisgarh


3 - Manager Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Branch Maharani
Hospital    Road,   Laxman      Avenue,     Jagdalpur,   District   Bastar,
Chhattisgarh
                                                         ---- Respondents

For Appellants/Claimants: Mr. Kalpesh Ruparel, Advocate For Respondent No.3 : Mr. Veethika Choubey, Advocate on behalf of Mr. T.K. Tiwari, Advocate For Respondents No.1 & 2: None

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board (08.04.2025)

1. This appeal arises out of the award dated 10.07.2019 passed by

2nd Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jagdalpur, District

Bastar (C.G.), in Claim Case No. 28/2019 awarding compensation of

Rs.11,52,880/- with interest @ 9% per annum, in favour of the

appellants/claimants for their irreparable loss.

2. The averment in the claim petition, is that on 10.12.2018

Jayman Baghel (now deceased) was coming from Bastanar to his

village, around 6-7/PM, near village Mutanpal, Murdepara

driver/respondent No. 1 of offending vehicle (Bus) bearing registration

No. CG-17-SS-0352 drove the vehicle in rash and negligent manner

and dashed Jayman Baghel, due to which Jayman sustained grievous

injuries and died on spot. A report of the incident was lodged, based

on which offence was registered. It is stated that on the date of the

accident, age of the deceased was 32 years, he was doing the work of

Mason and was earning Rs. 12,000/- per month from his work. Due

to the casual death of the deceased, there is an irreparable loss to the

appellants/claimants. Therefore, the appellants preferred an

application before the Tribunal claiming compensation to the tune of

Rs. 34,35,480/-.

3. Learned Tribunal, on a close scrutiny of the evidence brought on

record, assessed monthly income of the deceased to Rs.5,000, given

40% future prospects, deducted 1/5 income towards personal and

living expenses and applied multiplier of 16 and awarded Rs.

10,82,880/-. Furthermore, Rs.70,000/- has been awarded by the

Tribunal in other heads. Thus, total Rs.11,52,880/- has been

awarded in favour of the appellants/claimants with interest @ 9% per

annum, from the date of application till its realization. Hence, this

appeal has been filed by the appellants/claimants for enhancement of

compensation.

4. Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants submits that the

compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side and needs

to be enhanced suitably. He further submits that the claimants have

pleaded the income of the deceased as Rs. 12,000/- per month, but

the learned Claims Tribunal has only assessed the income of the

deceased as Rs. 5,000/- per month and awarded total compensation

of Rs.10,82,880/- including the amount of other conventional heads

of Rs. 70,000/-. The learned counsel urged that the Tribunal erred in

not assessing the proper monthly income of the deceased. Learned

Counsel further submits that the Tribunal has also awarded lesser

amount on other heads, therefore, this appeal may be allowed and

amount of compensation may be enhanced suitably.

5. None appeared on behalf of respondents No. 1 & 2.

6. On the other hand, it is submitted on behalf of counsel for

respondent No.3 that in view of facts and circumstances of case, the

impugned award is just and proper and requires no interference by

this Court.

7. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the documents on

record.

8. Now this Court shall examine as to whether the compensation of

Rs.11,52,880/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper

compensation in the given facts and circumstances of the case.

9. As regards the income of the deceased, though the claimants

have pleaded that the deceased was earning Rs.12,000/-. per month

from Mason work, but no documentary evidence in support thereof

has been produced, but it cannot be said that the deceased was not

earning anything from his work. Therefore, in absence of any reliable

evidence regarding income of the deceased, keeping in mind the

nature of occupation, date of accident, wage structure prevailing on

the date of accident, price index and cost of living etc. specially

notification by Labour Department for minimum wages. Upon

considering the aforementioned factors, I find it appropriate to take

income of deceased as Rs. 8,658/- per month as minimum wages, at

the relevant time of accident i.e. 10.12.2018. The annual income

comes to Rs. 1,03,896/- per annum. As per National Insurance

Company Ltd., Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others, (2017) 16 SCC 680

after adding 40% towards future prospects i.e. Rs. 41,558/-, the

annual income comes to Rs. 1,45,454/-.

10. The deceased was aged about 32 years and the claimants are

the mother, father, sisters, wife & children of the deceased so

deduction towards personal expenses would be 1/5 i.e. Rs.29,090/-

which dependency comes to Rs. 1,16,363/- (145454-29090). In view

of judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma (Smt.) and

others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported in

(2009) 6 SCC 121 and National Insurance Company Ltd., Vs.

Pranay Sethi and Others, (2017) 16 SCC 680 considering the age of

the deceased, after applying multiplier of 16, the total loss of

dependency works out to Rs. 18,61,808/- (116363 x 16). The

claimants are further entitled to get Rs. 15,000/- for loss of estate,

Rs. 15,000/- for funeral expenses and as per 'Magma General

Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nanu, reported in AIR Online 2018 SC 189,

they are further entitled to get Rs. 40,000/- each for loss of love and

affection. Therefore, the claimants would become entitled for total

compensation of Rs. 23,31,808/-. Thus, the claimants are entitled for

compensation in the following manner:-

          S.No.                 Heads                       Calculation

            01     Towards loss of dependency        Rs. 18,61,808/-
            02     Towards loss of estate            Rs. 15,000/-
            03     Towards love and affection to     Rs. 4,40,000/-
                   each claimants @ Rs. 40,000/-
            04     Funeral Expenses                  Rs. 15,000/-
                                Total                Rs. 23,31,808/-

11. Thus, the total compensation is recomputed as Rs. 23,31,808/-.

After deducting Rs. 11,52,880/- as awarded by the Tribunal, the

enhancement would be Rs. 11,78,928/-.

12. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. The claimants shall

be entitled to get Rs. 11,78,928/- in addition to what is already

awarded by the Claims Tribunal. The enhanced amount will carry

interest @ 6% from the date of enhancement of the award till its

realization. The impugned award stands modified to the above extent

and rest of the conditions shall remain intact.

13. The Registry is further directed to communicate the claimants in

writing "the enhanced amount" in this appeal as against the amount

awarded by the Tribunal. The said communication be made in Hindi