Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Somta vs Sarnam Singh on 6 November, 2025
Author: Hirdesh
Bench: Hirdesh
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:28122
1 MA-301-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE HIRDESH
ON THE 6 th OF NOVEMBER, 2025
MISC. APPEAL No. 301 of 2016
SMT. SOMTA
Versus
SARNAM SINGH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Akhlesh Kumar Gupta - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Kamal Kumar Jain- Advocate for respondent No.2.
Shri Kamal Kumar Rochalani- Advocate for respondent No.3.
ORDER
This miscellaneous appeal has been filed by the appellant/claimant
under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 , being aggrieved by
the Award dated 18.12.2015 passed by the First Additional Member, Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, Gwalior (M.P.) (in short "the Claims Tribunal")
in Claim Case No.90/2015. The appellant seeks enhancement of
compensation on the ground of inadequacy.
2. The date of accident, issue of negligence and the liability of the
respondents are not in dispute. The findings recorded by the Claims Tribunal in
this regard are not in question.
3. As per findings of the Claims Tribunal, in the case of death of Dileep in
the motor accident, an amount of compensation to the tune of Rs.6,65,000/- has
been awarded by the Claims Tribunal with interest from the date of filing of claim
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:28122
2 MA-301-2016
petition till its realization.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant/claimant submitted that the Award
is contrary to settled principles of law and suffers from serious errors of
appreciation. It is contended that the Tribunal assessed the income on the
lower side. The deceased was working as a labourer by doing work of colour
painting and used to earn Rs.10,000/- per month at the time of
accident. However, the Claims Tribunal assessed income of the deceased only
Rs.5,000/- per month, which is inadequate and on lower side. Learned counsel
for the appellant/claimant further contended that Claims Tribunal has
committed an error in not awarding any future prospects as well as
reasonable amount in other heads i.e. loss of estate, loss of consortium,
funeral expenses etc. Hence, it is prayed that reasonable amount of
compensation may be awarded to the claimant.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondents supported the
impugned Award and submitted that the Claims Tribunal has rightly assessed the
compensation on the basis of the evidence available on record. It is contended
that the appeal lacks merit and deserves to be dismissed.
6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the
Claims Tribunal.
7. After hearing counsel for the parties, it is found that Claims
Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased is on lower side. In view of
the judgments in Sukhdevi v. Devendra Kumar , ILR 2014 MP 172; Kanwar
Devi v. Bansal Roadways , 2008 ACJ 2182; and National Insurance Co. Ltd.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:28122
3 MA-301-2016
v. Renu Devi , (2008) 3 ACC 134 , when documentary proof of income is
lacking, income is to be assessed as per the minimum wages applicable and,
therefore, monthly income of deceased is to be assessed as Rs.5,845/- under
the unskilled category.
8. As regards loss of income including future prospects, in the light of
judgment of National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi , 2017 ACJ 2700 ,
the claimant is entitled for loss of income including future prospects of 40%
and as per the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma and
ors. Vs Delhi Transport Corporation and Anr. reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121 ,
even if age of the deceased is to be taken into account, multiplier of "18" has
been rightly applied by the Claims Tribunal.
9. Accordingly, appellant-claimant is entitled to get compensation
under the following heads:-
HEAD AMOUNT
Rs 5,845/- per month X12=70140/- per
Income
annum
After adding Future
Rs.98196/-
Prospects@40%
After adding Dependency 2/3 Rs.65,464/-
Loss of Income Rs.65,464X18= 11,78,352-
Other Heads:-
Loss of Consortium Rs.40,000 X 1 = Rs. 40,000/-
Loss of Estate and funeral
Rs.30,000/-
expenses
Total Compensation = Rs.12,48,352/-
10. Thus, the just and proper amount of compensation in the instant
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:28122
4 MA-301-2016
case is Rs.12,48,352/- as against the Award of the Claims Tribunal of
Rs.6,65,000/-. Accordingly, the appellants/claimants are entitled to an
additional sum of Rs. 5,83,352/- over and above the amount, which has been
awarded by the Claims Tribunal.
11. In the result, this miscellaneous appeal is partly allowed, by
enhancing the compensation amount by a sum of Rs. 5,83,352/-. The
enhanced amount shall carry interest as fixed by the learned Claims Tribunal
from the date of filing of claim petition till its realization. The said amount
be paid within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified
copy of this order. Rest of conditions as imposed by learned Claims Tribunal
shall remain intact.
12. If the enhanced amount of compensation is in excess to the
valuation of appeal, the difference of the Court fee (if not already paid) shall
be deposited by the appellant- claimant within a period of one month and
proof thereof, shall be submitted before the Registry. Thereafter, the Registry
shall issue the certified copy of the order passed today.
In view of the above, miscellaneous appeal filed by the
appellant/claimant stands disposed of.
(HIRDESH)
JUDGE
*AVI*
