[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Meenabai vs Sanjay Singh on 30 March, 2026
Author: Sanjay K. Agrawal
Bench: Sanjay K. Agrawal
Page 1 of 5
(MAC No.76/2020)
Digitally 2026:CGHC:14808
signed by
SISTA
SISTA
SOMAYAJULU NAFR
SOMAYAJULU Date:
2026.04.01
10:48:55
+0530 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MAC No. 76 of 2020
{Arising out of award dated 16-5-2019 passed by the Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal, Janjgir-Champa in Motor Accident Claim Case
No.86/2018}
1. Meenabai, W/o Late Saheblal, aged about 47 years,
2. Sheela Anant, S/o Late Saheblal, aged about 29 years,
3. Rajesh Anant, S/o Late Saheblal, aged about 27 years,
4. Aarti Anant, D/o Late Saheblal, aged about 25 years,
5. Rupesh Anant, S/o Late Saheblal, aged about 21 years,
6. Ajay Anant, S/o Late Saheblal, aged about 16 years,
7. Maniram Anant, S/o Late Thandaram, aged about 70 years,
8. Terasbai, W/o Maniram, Aged about 67 years,
Appellant No.6 is minor through his natural guardian/mother
namely Meena Bai, aged about 47 years
All above R/o Village Jaithkham Chowk, Harrabhata, Post Podi,
District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh
(Claimants)
... Appellants
versus
1. Sanjay Singh, S/o Lakhan Singh, Aged about 42 years, R/o Kumhari
Khurd, Thana Baradwara, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh
(Driver of the offending Vehicle)
2. Ramnarayan Kashya (Died) Through LRs
(Owner of the offending Vehicle)
Page 2 of 5
(MAC No.76/2020)
2(A) Shyam Sundar Kashyap, S/o Late Ramnarayan Kashyap, Aged
about 34 years,
2(B) Murari Kashyap, S/o Late Ramnarayan Kashyap, Aged about 31
years
Both above Respondent No.2(A) & 2(B) R/o Ward No.5, Navagaon,
Near Murli Hotel, Katghora (C.G.)
3. The New India Insurance Company Ltd., Sada Complex, Transport
Nagar, Korba, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh
(Insurer of the offending Vehicle)
(Defendants)
... Respondents
For Appellants : Mr. Kabeer Kalwani, Advocate on behalf of Mr.
Anurag Singh, Advocate.
For Respondent No.3 : Mr. Rahul Singh Thakur, Advocate on behalf of
Mr. Sourabh Sharma, Advocate.
Single Bench:-
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 has
been preferred by the appellants herein/claimants seeking
enhancement in the amount of compensation, challenging the
impugned award dated 16-5-2019 passed by the Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal, Janjgir-Champa in Motor Accident Claim Case
No.86/2018, whereby the learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a
total sum of ₹ 10,06,000/- as compensation for the death of
Saheblal, who was a Skilled Labour being Carpenter, aged about 46
years at the time of incident. The appellants herein/claimants are
wife, children and parents, respectively, of deceased Saheblal.
(MAC No.76/2020)
2. Mr. Kabeer Kalwani, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants herein/claimants, would submit that the deceased was a
Skilled Labour being Carpenter and the learned Claims Tribunal
ought to have taken his monthly income to be ₹ 9,530/- on the
basis of notification issued under the Minimum Wages Act in the
year 2021, whereas, it has been taken as ₹ 7,500/, therefore, the
amount of compensation be enhanced suitably.
3. Mr. Rahul Singh Thakur, learned counsel appearing on behalf of
respondent No.3 herein/Insurance Company, would support the
impugned award and oppose the appeal.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered their
rival submissions made herein-above and also gone through the
record with utmost circumspection.
5. The learned Claims Tribunal has assessed the monthly income of
deceased Saheblal to be ₹ 7,500/-, 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 ₹ 9,530/- (as per minimum
wages prescribed at relevant time).
6. Thus, considering the evidence available on record and that the
deceased was a Skilled Labour, 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. v. Delhi Transport Corporation
(2017) 16 SCC 680
(MAC No.76/2020)
& Ors2 and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu
Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors3, this Court is computing the
compensation as below:-
S. Heads Compensation Compensation
No. awarded by the awarded by this
Tribunal Court/New
Calculation
1. Income ₹ 7,500/- per month. ₹ 9,530/- per month.
Yearly Income = ₹ 7,500 x Yearly Income = ₹ 9,530 x
12 = ₹ 90,000/-. 12 = ₹ 1,14,360/-.
2. Future NIL (+) 25% i.e. ₹ 28,590;
Prospect total yearly income = ₹
1,14,360 + 28,590 = ₹
1,42,950/-.
3. Deduction (-) 1/5 = ₹ 18,000/- (-) 1/5 = ₹ 28,590/-
₹ 90,000 - 18,000 = ₹ ₹ 1,42,950 - 28,590 = ₹
72,000/- 1,14,360/-
4. Multiplier (x) 13 = ₹ 9,36,000/- (x) 13 = ₹ 14,86,680/-
5. Loss of ₹ 15,000/- ₹ 15,000/-
Estate
6. Funeral ₹ 15,000/- ₹ 15,000/-
Expenses
7. Loss of ₹ 40,000/- ₹ 40,000/-
Consortium
to wife
8. Loss of NIL ₹ 44,000/- x 7 = ₹
Consortium 3,08,000/-
to children
and parents
Total ₹ 10,06,000/- ₹ 18,64,680/-
7. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of ₹
10,06,000/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to ₹
18,64,680/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of ₹
10,06,000/-, the appellants are held entitled for an additional
amount of ₹ 8,58,680/-. The concerned respondent is directed to
deposit the amount of compensation as enhanced by this Court
within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this
(2009) 6 SCC 121
(2018) 18 SCC 130
(MAC No.76/2020)
order. The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest
@ 8% per annum from the date of filing of claim application before
the Tribunal i.e. 20-9-2018 till its realisation. Rest of the
conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact.
8. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed in part and the impugned award
is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above.
Sd/-
(Sanjay K. Agrawal)
Judge
Soma
