[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Smt. Balwanti Tirkey vs Satish Kashyap on 16 April, 2026
Author: Sanjay K. Agrawal
Bench: Sanjay K. Agrawal
1
2026:CGHC:17521
ASHOK NAFR
SAHU
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Digitally signed
by ASHOK
SAHU
Date:
2026.04.17
10:15:14 +0530
MAC No. 132 of 2019
1 - Smt. Balwanti Tirkey, D/o. Late Ranjit Tirkey, Aged About 20 Years,
R/o. Village Jhargaon, Post Gholeng, Tahsil And District - Jashpur,
Chhattisgarh.
2 - Minor Nirjala Tirkey, D/o. Late Ranjit Tirkey, Aged About 1 Year,
Minor Through Next Friend, R/o. Village Jhargaon, Post Gholeng, Tahsil
And District - Jashpur, Chhattisgarh.
3 - Mahinder Tirkey, S/o. Late Amasu Tirkey, Aged About 49 Years, R/o.
Village Jhargaon, Post Gholeng, Tahsil And District - Jashpur,
Chhattisgarh.
4 - Smt. Premdani Tirkey, W/o. Mahinder Tirkey, Aged About 45 Years,
R/o. Village Jhargaon, Post Gholeng, Tahsil And District - Jashpur,
Chhattisgarh.
5 - Rakesh Tirkey, S/o. Mahinder Tirkey, Aged About 20 Years, R/o.
Village Jhargaon, Post Gholeng, Tahsil And District - Jashpur,
Chhattisgarh.
6 - Minor Sanjit Tirkey, S/o. Mahinder Tirkey, Aged About 17 Years,
Minor Through Next Friend, R/o. Village Jhargaon, Post Gholeng, Tahsil
And District - Jashpur, Chhattisgarh.
7 - Minor Saraswati Tirkey, D/o. Mahinder Tirkey, Aged About 16 Years,
Minor Through Next Friend, R/o. Village Jhargaon, Post Gholeng, Tahsil
And District - Jashpur, Chhattisgarh.
2
8 - Minor Sanjana Tirkey, D/o. Mahinder Tirkey, Aged About 14 Years,
Minor Through Next Friend, R/o. Village Jhargaon, Post Gholeng, Tahsil
And District - Jashpur, Chhattisgarh.
9 - Minor Sasita Tirkey, D/o. Mahinder Tirkey, Aged About 13 Years,
Minor Through Next Friend, R/o. Village Jhargaon, Post Gholeng, Tahsil
And District - Jashpur, Chhattisgarh.
... Appellants
versus
1 - Satish Kashyap, W/o. Shri Jyotindranath, R/o. Village - Hutar Jutjora,
District - Khunti, Jharkhand.
2 - Vijay Urao, S/o. Mahindar Urao, Aged About 36 Years, Occupation -
Driver, R/o. Village - Bhandara, Ward No. 6, Pandara, Police Station -
Pandara, District - Lohardaga, Jharkhand.
3 - Branch Manager, The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Local
Branch Office, Pathalgaon Chhattisgarh.
... Respondents
For Appellants : Mr. Divyanand Patel, Advocate on behalf of
Mr. Rishikant Mahobia, Advocate
For Respondent : Mr. Raghvendra Verma, Advocate on behalf of
No.3 Mr. Deepak Gupta, Advocate
(Single Bench)
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal
Judgment on Board
16.04.2026
1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has
been preferred by the appellants/ claimants seeking enhancement of
the amount of compensation, challenging the impugned award dated
10.10.2018 passed by the Additional Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal (F.T.C) Jashpur, in Claim Case No.29/2018, by which the
claim application of the claimants has been allowed and an amount
of compensation to the tune of Rs. 12,69,600/- has been awarded to
the claimants for the death of Ranjit Tirkey, aged about 23 years, at
the time of accident.
2. Appellants, who are wife, daughter, father, mother, brothers and
sisters, have filed an application under Section 166 of the Motor
Vehicles Act before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for
brevity "Claims Tribunal") seeking compensation to the tune of Rs.
38,25,000/- pleading therein that on the date of accident, deceased
Ranjit Tirkey, aged about 23 years, was sole bread earner of the
family and on account of his untimely death in the accident, the
appellants have suffered economical and psychological difficulties.
3. Learned Claims Tribunal, upon appreciation of pleadings and
evidence placed on record by respective parties, held that deceased
Ranjit Tirkey died in the accident arising out of rash & negligent
driving of the offending vehicle driven by respondent No.2, owned
by respondent No.1 and insured by respondent No.3 herein. Breach
of conditions of insurance policy was not found to be proved and
after calculating the amount of compensation, the learned Claims
Tribunal has awarded Rs. 12,69,600/- with interest @ 9% per
annum from the date of filing of claim application.
4. Mr. Divyanand Patel, learned counsel appearing for the appellants,
would submit that the learned Claims Tribunal has awarded very
meager amount, as the Claims Tribunal erred in assessing income of
deceased to be Rs.5,000/- per month, which should be Rs. 7,930/-
per month. as per Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued
by the office of the Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh. Therefore,
the instant appeal be allowed and the amount of compensation
awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal may be enhanced suitably.
5. Mr. Raghvendra Verma, learned counsel appearing for the
respondent No.3/ insurance company, would submit that the
appellants have failed to prove the exact income of deceased by
producing clinching and admissible piece of evidence, hence, the
learned Claims Tribunal is justified in assessing income of deceased
on notional basis. The amount of compensation awarded by the
learned Claims Tribunal is just and proper, which does not call for
any interference.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival
submissions made herein-above and gone through the records
minutely.
7. Learned Claims Tribunal has assessed the monthly income of
deceased Ranjit Tirkey to be Rs. 5,000/- per month, however, in the
opinion of this Court, as per the Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages
Notification issued by the office of Labour Commissioner,
Chhattisgarh, the monthly income of the deceased should be Rs.
7,930/- per month. 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 & Ors 2 and
Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru
Ram & Ors3, this Court is re-computing the compensation as
below:-
Heads Compensation awarded Compensation awarded
by the Tribunal by this Court
Income as per Rs. 5000 per month i.e. Rs. 7,930 per month i.e.
minimum wages Rs. 5000 x 12 = Rs. 7,930 x 12 =
Rs. 60,000/- per annum Rs. 95,160/- per annum
Add future Rs. 60,000 + Rs. 95,160 +
prospects @ 40% Rs. 24,000 Rs. 38,064
= Rs. 84,000/- = Rs. 1,33,224/-
Deduction of 1/5 Rs. 84,000 - 16,800 Rs. 1,33,224 - 26,645
towards personal = Rs.67,200/- = Rs. 1,06,580/-
expenses
Multiplier of 18 Rs. 67,200 x 18 = Rs. 1,06,580 x 18 =
Rs. 12,09,600/- Rs. 19,18,440/-
Loss of Estate Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 15,000/-
Funeral Expenses Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 15,000/-
1 (2017) 16 SCC 680
2 (2009) 6 SCC 121
3 (2018) 18 SCC 130
Loss of consortium Rs. 30,000/- Rs. 1,76,000
(Appellant No.1 to 4)
Total Rs. 12,69,600/- Rs. 21,24,440/-
8. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of
Rs. 12,69,600/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.
21,24,440/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs. 12,69,600/-
already awarded by the Claims Tribunal, the appellants are entitled
for an additional amount of Rs. 8,54,840/-. The concerned
respondent is directed to deposit the amount of compensation as
enhanced by this Court within a period of 45 days. The additional
amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 9% per annum from
the date of filing of claim application before the Tribunal till its
realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall
remain intact.
9. Accordingly, this appeal is partly allowed and the impugned award
is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above.
Sd/-
(Sanjay K. Agrawal)
Judge
Ashok
