Chattisgarh High Court
Bode Baghel vs Mohd. Mahimuddin on 29 August, 2025
1
2025:CGHC:44080
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MAC No. 358 of 2024
1 - Bode Baghel W/o Late Shri Ramdhar Baghel Aged About 52 Years R/o Village
Briringpal, Police Station Parpa District Bastar Chhattisgarh.
2 - Ku. Kusumlata Baghel D/o Late Shri Ramdhar Baghel Aged About 20 Years R/o Village
Briringpal, Police Station Parpa District Bastar Chhattisgarh.
... Appellant(s)
versus
1 - Mohd. Mahimuddin S/o Shri Jahiruddin Aged About 53 Years Through Swaroopchand
Jain Director Payal Travels, Adarsh Nagar, Durg District Durg Chhattisgarh (Vehicle Driver)
2 - Swaroopchand Jain Director Payal Travels Adarsh Nagar, Adarsh Nagar, Durg District
Durg Chhattisgarh (Vehicle Driver)
3 - The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Through Branch Manager Branch Office
Moorti Line, Hotel Lakshman Avenue, Jagdalpur District Bastar Chhattisgarh. (Insurance
Company)
... Respondent(s)
For Appellant (s) : Shri Shikhar Shukla, Advocate
For Respondent No.3 : Shri Akash Shrivastava, Advocate
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput
Order on Board
29/08/2025
1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for
short 'M.V.Act') has been filed challenging the award dated 14/09/2023 passed
in claim case No.269/2022 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bastar,
Place-Jagdalpur (CG). By the impugned award, against a claim of
Rs.32,60,000/-, learned Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.14,70,800/-
in favour of the appellants / claimants.
2. The claim application under Section 166 of the MV Act has been filed on
account of death of Rupesh Baghel in an accident that occurred on 23/10/2022
by rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle (Bus) bearing
registration No.CG 17/KP 4870 by respondent No.1, owned by respondent
No.2 and insured with respondent No.3. As per pleadings of the claim
application, the deceased was aged about 20 years and was earning Rs.15,000/-
per month by agriculture and labour work. Therefore, the aforestated
compensation was claimed.
3. The respondents filed written statement and denied averments of the
claim application. The insurance company took a plea that there is violation of
the terms and conditions of the insurance policy.
4. On the basis of above pleadings, learned claims tribunal framed issues
and decided the same in favour of the appellants / claimants and awarded the
abovestated compensation.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant that though the deceased was aged abut
19-20 years, however as the husband of appellant No.1 and father of appellant
No.2 was not alive, they were dependent upon the income of the deceased.
Learned Tribunal though assessed the monthly income of the deceased to
Rs.9,000/-, however, considering the dependency, minimum wages and nature
of job, learned Tribunal ought to have considered the monthly income of the
deceased to Rs.10,000/-. Apart from this, he submits that compensation on all
other heads requires suitable enhancement.
6. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.3 submits that just
compensation has been awarded, sister of the deceased is not entitled to any
consortium and as such, there is no requirement of any interference by this
Court in the impugned award.
7. Heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions
and perused the record.
8. Taking into consideration the submission made, age of the deceased, date
of incident, nature of job, minimum wages prevailing and also considering the
fact that father of the deceased has already died and he was the sole bread
winner of the family having mother and a sister who were dependent upon the
income of the deceased, this Court is inclined to assess the monthly income of
the deceased to Rs.10,000/- and taking guidance from the judgments of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma and ors. v. Delhi
Transport Corporation and ors., (2009) 6 SCC 121, National Insurance Co.
Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi and ors, (2017) 16 SCC 680 and Magma General
Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram and ors., (2018) 18 SCC
130 propose to recompute the compensation in the following manner -
1. Monthly income Rs.10000/-
2. Future prospects 40% (10000 + Rs.14000/-
4000)
3. Yearly income (14000x12) Rs.168000/-
4. 1/2 deduction for personal expenses Rs.84000/-
(168000/2)
5. Multiplier of 18 (84000 X 18) Rs.1512000/-
6. Loss of estate +Rs.16500/-
7. Funeral expenses +Rs.16500/-
8. Filial consortium to the mother +Rs.40000/-
9. Mental agony to the sister +Rs.40000/-
Total Compensation =Rs.1625000/-
9. The learned Tribunal has awarded Rs.14,70,800/- which is deducted
from the total compensation now awarded and the enhanced compensation
comes to Rs.1,54,200/-. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case,
interest @ 6% is also awarded on the enhanced amount of compensation from
the date of filing of appeal i.e. 19/02/2024 to be deposited by the insurance
company within a period of 60 days. After the amount of compensation is
deposited, Rs.50,000/- be invested in the name of appellant No.2 and
Rs.50,000/- be invested in the name of appellant No.1 as fixed deposit in a
Nationalised Bank for a period of 1 year. Remaining amount shall be disbursed
to appellant No.1 through Bank transaction / account payee cheque.
10. The appeal, thus, partly allowed.
Sd/-
({Sachin Singh Rajput})
JUDGE
Deepti
Digitally
signed by
DEEPTI
DEEPTI HARIKUMAR
HARIKUMAR Date:
2025.09.01
14:12:50
+0530
