SMT. SHWETA PANDEY vs SUNIL DAS MAHANT

1

CGHC010008512023 2026:CGHC:45095
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MAC No. 61 of 2023
1 - Smt. Shweta Pandey W/o Late Chakradhar Pandey Aged About 35 Years
Caste Bramhan, R/o Village Nagarda, Thana Nagarda, District Janjgir
Champa Chhattisgarh Hall Mukam Village Mahuda, Thana and Tahsil
Champa District Champa Chhattisgarh.
2 - Yagyapal Pandey S/o Late Chakradhar Pandey Aged About 14 Years
Minor Through Legal Guardianmother Smt. Shweta Pandey W/o Late
Chakradhar Pandey Caste Bramhan, R/o Village Nagarda, Thana Nagarda,
District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh Hall Mukam Village Mahuda, Thana
and Tahsil Champa District Champa Chhattisgarh.
3 - Khilavan Pandey S/o Late Chakradhar Pandey Aged About 14 Years
Minor Through Legal Guardianmother Smt. Shweta Pandey W/o Late
Chakradhar Pandey Caste Bramhan, R/o Village Nagarda, Thana Nagarda,
District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh Hall Mukam Village Mahuda, Thana
and Tahsil Champa District Champa Chhattisgarh.
4 - Bharat Lal S/o Late Bodhan Aged About 74 Years Caste Bramhan, R/o
Village Nagarda, Thana Nagarda, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh
Hall Mukam Village Mahuda, Thana And Tahsil Champa District Champa
Chhattisgarh.
5 - Smt. Jayanti Bai W/o Bharat Lal Aged About 65 Years Caste Bramhan,
R/o Village Nagarda, Thana Nagarda, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh
Hall Mukam Village Mahuda, Thana and Tahsil Champa District Champa
Chhattisgarh. ... Appellants
versus
1 - Sunil Das Mahant S/o Pardeshi Das Mahant Aged About 23 Years R/o -
Purani Basti Dadarkhurd Manikpur, Thana Rampur, District Korba
Chhattisgarh. (Owner cum Driver of Offending Vehicle Motor Cycle No. C.G.
12/a.Z./0914).
2 - Branch Manager, Magma H. D. I. General Insurance Company Limited,

2
No. -3, New, Ground Floor Rajkumar Office-Bilaspur District Bilaspur
Chhattisgarh (Insurer of Offending Vehicle Motor Cycle No. C.G.
12/A.Z./0914). ... Respondents
For the appellants : Mr. Vikas Pandey, Advocate
For respondent no.2 : Mr. Prashant Sahu, Advocate
Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal)
Order on Board
26.10.2026
1. This appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short
“MV Act”) has been filed seeking enhancement of compensation, challenging
the impugned award dated 09.11.2022 passed by the Ist Additional Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, Janjgir Chhattisgarh in Claim Case No. 50/2022
whereby a total compensation of Rs.12,99,577/- has been granted.
2 . As per the facts pleaded in claim application filed under Section 166
of the MV Act, deceased Chakradhar Pandey sustained grievous head
injury in an accident took place on 28.03.2022 due to rash and negligent
driving of respondent no.1 who drove the offending Motorcycle No. C.G.
12/AZ/0914 and hit the deceased’s motorcycle. The deceased was
immediately admitted in hospital for treatment where he died on
01.04.2022. Appellant No.1 is the widow, appellants 2 & 3 are minor
children and appellants 4 & 5 are parents of the deceased. They being legal
heirs have filed claim application u/s 166 of the M.V. Act, seeking a total
compensation of Rs. 1,31,24,000/-.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the income taken by
the Tribunal is on lower side and the amounts granted under the other
conventional heads are also meagre, thereby, just compensation has not
been awarded. He prays that the instant appeal be allowed and the
compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal may suitably be enhanced.
4. Learned counsel for respondent no.3/Insurer submits that the

3
Tribunal has granted adequate compensation and the impugned award
needs no interference.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival
submissions and perused the record with utmost circumspection.
6. The claimants pleaded that the deceased was earning monthly
income of Rs.30,000/- by doing the job of Priest and by driving the vehicle.
However, the Tribunal took the income of deceased as Rs. 6000/- per
month, which seems to be on lower side. In absence of any cogent reliable
evidence regarding the nature of job and income of deceased and looking to
the prevalent market rates, it would be appropriate to take his monthly
income to be Rs.9,280/- treating him as unskilled labour as per the the
Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages applicable at the time of accident occurred
on 28.03.2022.
7. Since the age of deceased was found to be 37 years and there are 5
dependents, following the case-law laid down by Supreme Court, the
Tribunal has rightly added 40% future prospectus, deducted 1/4th towards
personal expenses and applied multiplier 15 which cannot be said to be
unsustainable.
8. The Tribunal has awarded a joint lumpsum of Rs.77,000/- under the
other conventional heads i.e., loss of consortium; loss of estate and
funeral expenses which appears to be meagre. As regards consortium, it
appears that a lumpsum amount (44,000/-) has been granted for all the 5
claimants, which cannot be allowed to sustain. Under Motor Accident

Claims, the Supreme Court has established that every individual
dependent-claimant is entitled to a separate compensation for the loss of
consortium or love and affection. There are five claimants in this case. Thus
each claimant is entitled to Rs.44,000/- separately and the total comes to
Rs.2,20,000/- under this specific head.

4
9. As regards treatment expenses, the claimants have produced medical
bills vide Ex.P-7 to P-13 showing that an amount of Rs.88,577/- was
incurred for treatment of deceased. The death has occurred on 01.04.2022
after four days of the accident. Though the Tribunal has properly granted
Rs.88,577/- in this regard, yet it failed to grant any compensation for
attendant charges or for the family members who lost time and resources to
care of the deceased during treatment. Therefore, it would be appropriate
to combine the medical expenses of Rs.88,577/- with a reasonable
allowance for care-taking, rounding the total figure up to a flat 1,20,000/-. ₹
10. Thus, in the light of the aforesaid discussion and in view of the
decisions of the Supreme Court rendered in National Insurance Company
Ltd. Versus Pranay Sethi (2017) 16 SCC 680 ; Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi
Transport Corporation (2009) 6 SCC 121 and Magma General Insurance Co.
Ltd. Versus Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram (2018) 18 SCC 130 , this Court is
computing the compensation as below :
Sl.No . Heads Compensation
awarded by the
Tribunal
Compensation
awarded by this
Court
1. Total loss of
dependency
11,34,000/-

Rs.9,280 X 12 =
1,11,360 plus
Future Prospectus-
40% i.e., 44,544/-.
= 1,55,904/- minus
1/4th deduction of
personal expenses
i.e., 38,976/ - =
1,16,928 x 15
multiplier =
17,53,920/-
2. Medical Expenses
plus Care-taking/
attendant charges
88,577/-
(only medical expenses
granted)
1,20,000/-
3. Loss of estate 16,500/-
4. Funeral expenses 16,500/-
5. Loss of consortium (44000 x 5

5

Claimants)
2,20,000/-

6. Lumpsum granted
under the other
heads at Sl.Nos. 3,
4 & 5.
77,000/-
Total Rs. 12,99,577/- 21,26,920/-
11. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs.
12,99,577/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to
Rs.21,26,920/- Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs 12,99,577/- the
appellants held entitled for an additional sum of Rs.8,27,343/-. The
additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 6% per annum
from the date of filing claim application before the Tribunal till its
realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain
intact.
12. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed in part and the impugned award
is modified to the extent as indicated hereinabove.
Sd/-
Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal
Judge
Rao
Digitally
signed by
ALLENA
ANNAJEE
RAO
Date:
2026.10.27
15:20:09
+0530
ALLENA
ANNAJEE
RAO