JYOTI RAJWADE vs UMASHANKAR SONWANI

1

CGHC010446252024 2026:CGHC:44624
NAFR
PRASHANT
DEWANGAN
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Digitally signed
by PRASHANT
DEWANGAN
Date: 2026.10.16
14:51:46 +0530
MAC No. 2473 of 2024
1 - Jyoti Rajwade W/o Late Hom Kumar Aged About 26 Years R/o
Ward No. 19, Chhinddand (Kharwat), Tahsil Baikunthpur, District
Koriya (Chhattisgarh)
2 - Rubi Rajwade D/o Late Hom Kumar Aged About 8 Years, Minor
Through- Natural Guardian Mother Jyoti Rajwade W/o Late Hom
Kumar, R/o Ward No. 19, Chhinddand (Kharwat), Tahsil
Baikunthpur, District Koriya (Chhattisgarh)
3 - Pari Rajwade D/o Late Hom Kumar Aged About 6 Years Minor
Through- Natural Guardian Mother Jyoti Rajwade W/o Late Hom
Kumar, R/o Ward No. 19, Chhinddand (Kharwat), Tahsil
Baikunthpur, District Koriya (Chhattisgarh)
... Appellants
versus
1 - Umashankar Sonwani S/o Ramdas Aged About 45 Years Resident
Of Post Office Line Shivpur/charcha, Police Station Charcha, Tahsil
Baikunthpur, District Koriya (C.G.) (Driver Offending Vehicle CG-
16/B-4200)
2 - Nandlal Prasad S/o Arjun Marik Aged About 40 Years Resident Of
Quarter No. 447, West Nepal Gate, Shivpur/ Charcha, Police Station
Charcha, Tahsil Baikunthpur, District Koriya (C.G.) (Owner Of
Offending Vehicle CG-16/B-4200)
3 - Branch Manager, Ako General Insurance Company Limited Unit
No. 301, Third Floor, E-Wing Lotus Corporate Park, Goregaon East Of
Weston Express Highway Jai Coach Fly Over Goregaon, Mumbai-
400063 (Insurer Of Offending Vehicle CG-16/B-4200)
... Respondent(s)

2
For Appellants : Mr. Aditya Khare, Advocate
For Respondents No.1 and 2 : None
For Respondent No.3 : Mr. Pravin Kumar Tulsyan,
Advocate appears along with Mr.
Abhishek Nirala, Advocate
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal
Judgment on Board
(15/10/2026)
1. Heard on I.A. No.01/2024, an application for condonation of
delay.
2. The present appeal has been preferred by the
appellants/claimants seeking enhancement of the
compensation awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal.
3. For the reasons assigned therein, I am inclined to allow the
same and delay of 291 days in preferring of this appeal is,
hereby, condoned.
4. I.A. No.01/2024, thus, stands disposed of.
5. Heard on admission.
6. Admit.
7. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the case is
heard finally.
8. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
(for short the "Act of 1988") has been preferred by the
appellants/claimants seeking enhancement of the amount of
compensation, challenging the impugned award dated
25/11/2023, passed in Claim Case No.56/2022, whereby the
learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of

3
Rs.14,40,680/- as compensation for the death of Hom Kumar,
who died in a road accident which took place on 09/12/2021.
9. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the learned
Claims Tribunal erred in assessing the income of the deceased
at Rs. 6,700/- per month, whereas it ought to have been
assessed at Rs. 9,280/- per month in accordance with the
Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the Office
of the Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh. It is, therefore,
prayed that the instant appeal be allowed and the compensation
awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal be suitably enhanced.
10. Learned counsel appearing for Respondent No. 3/Insurance
Company submits that the learned Claims Tribunal, after duly
appreciating the oral and documentary evidence available on
record, has rightly awarded the compensation. It is further
submitted that the compensation awarded by the learned
Claims Tribunal is just and proper and does not warrant any
interference by this Court.
11. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their
rival submissions made herein-above and went through the
records with utmost circumspection.
12. Learned Claims Tribunal assessed the monthly income of the
deceased to be Rs.6,700/-, however, in the opinion of this
Court, as per the Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification
issued by the Office of Labour Comissioner, Chhattisgarh, the
monthly income of the deceased should be Rs.9,280/-. To this
extent, the impugned award warrants modification.

4
13. Further, on the basis of the documents available on record, the
learned Tribunal has held that the deceased was married aged
about 27 years at the time of the accident. Having regard to the
number of claimants (3), the Tribunal has added 40% towards
future prospects, deducted 1/3 towards the personal and living
expenses of the deceased, and applied the multiplier of ‘17’. The
learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 1,65,000/- under
the conventional heads. In the opinion of this Court, the
aforesaid assessment is just and proper and does not warrant
any interference.
14. Thus, in light of the aforesaid discussion and in light of the
judgments of the Supreme Court rendered in the matters of
1
National Insurance Company Ltd. V. Pranay Sethi , Sarla
2
Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Ors and
Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru
3
Ram & Ors , this Court is computing the compensation as
below:-
Sr.
Heads Compensation
Compensation
No.
awarded by the
awarded by this
Tribunal
Court
1 Income Rs. 6,700/- x 12
Rs. 9280 x 12 =
=80,400/-
1,11,360/-
2. Future
(+)40% (i.e. Rs.
(+)40% (i.e. Rs.
prospect
32,160) =
44,544) = 1,55,904/-
1,12,560/-
3. Deduction (-) 1/3 (i.e. 37,520)
(-) 1/3 (i.e. 51,968) =
= 75,040/-
1,03,936/-
1 (2017) 16 SCC 680
2 (2009) 6 SCC 121
3 (2018) 18 SCC 130

5
4. Multiplier (x) 17 =
(x) 17 = 17,66,912/-
12,75,680/-
5. Other
Rs. 1,65,000/-
Rs. 1,65,000/-
conventional
(16,500+16,500+
(16,500+16,500+44,0
heads
44,000 x 3)
00 x 3)
Total Rs. 14,40,680/- Rs. 19,31,912/-
15. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of
Rs. 14,40,680/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to
Rs.19,31,912/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of
Rs.14,40,680/-, the appellants are held entitled for an
additional amount of Rs. 4,91,232 /-. The additional amount of
compensation shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from filing
of the claim application before the Claims Tribunal till its
realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall
remain intact.
16. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed and the impugned
award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above.
17. The Registry is directed to communicate the claimants in writing
“the enhanced amount” in this appeal as against the award
made by the concerned Tribunal. The said communication be
made in Hindi Deonagri language and the help of paralegal
workers may be availed with a co-ordination of Secretary, Legal
Aid of the concerned area wherein the claimants resides.
Sd/-
(Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal)
Judge
Prashant