[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
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
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.
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
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
