ANIL KUMAR vs HARIRAM PANIKA

1

CGHC010279142024 2026:CGHC:46178
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MAC No. 1719 of 2024
1 - Anil Kumar S/o Late Katlam Singh, Aged About 28 Years Caste
Gond, R/o Village Patharra, Tehsil - Marwahi, District Gaurela -
Pendra - Marwahi, Chhattisgarh.
2 - Anjulata D/o Late Katlam Singh, Aged About 28 Years Caste
Gond, R/o Village Patharra, Tehsil - Marwahi, District Gaurela -
Pendra - Marwahi, Chhattisgarh.
3 - Ajit Kumar S/o Late Katlam Singh, Aged About 24 Years Caste
Gond, R/o Village Patharra, Tehsil - Marwahi, District Gaurela -
Pendra - Marwahi, Chhattisgarh.
... Appellants
versus
1 - Hariram Panika S/o Sukul Prasad Panika, Aged About 46 Years
R/o Village Barbaspur Amadand, Ward No. 11, P.S. Manendragarh,
District Koriya-Baikunthpur, Chhattisgarh,
2 - Vishwanath Prasad Yadav S/o Ravindra Kumar Yadav, R/o Ward
No. 21, Ambikapur Road, Manendragarh, District Koriya,
Baikunthpur, Chhattisgarh.
3 - The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Shriram Complex, Near
Kedia Talkies, Ring Road No. 43, Manendragarh Tehsil And P.S.
Manendragarh, District Koriya-Baikunthpur, Chhattisgarh.
... Respondents
For Appellants/Claimants : Mr. Achyut Tiwari, Adv.
For Respondent No. 3 : Mr. Akash Shrivastava, Adv.
For respondents No. 1 & 2 : None.
Digitally signed
by HEERA LAL
SAHU
Date:
2026.11.02
17:15:10
+0530

2
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal
Judgment on Board
(02.11.2026)
1. Heard on I.A. No. 01/2024, application for condonation of delay.
2. This is a claimants’ appeal for enhancement. Upon due
consideration, I.A. No. 01/2024 is allowed. Delay of 117 days in
filing the appeal is condoned.
3. Also heard on admission.
4. Admit.
5. Records of the Tribunal have been received.
6. With the consent of both the parties, the matter was heard
finally.
7. 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
09.01.2024, passed in Claim Case No. 20/2022, whereby the
learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of
Rs.7,50,000/- as compensation for the death of Ramkali (50-
years-old) who died in a road accident which took place on
20.05.2022.
8. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the deceased,
was a labourer and was earning Rs. 15,000/- per month;
therefore, the income assessed by the Claims Tribunal at Rs.
4,500/- per month is on the lower side, as on the date of the
accident, the minimum wages of the unskilled labourer were Rs.
9,960/-. Hence, the appeal be allowed, and the award passed by
the Claims Tribunal be suitably enhanced.
9. Learned counsel for respondent No.3/insurance company would
submit that the Claims Tribunal after appreciating oral and

3
documentary evidence available on record rightly awarded the
compensation amount. Hence, the compensation awarded by
the Claims Tribunal is just and proper and requires no
interference.
10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their
rival submissions made herein-above and went through the
records with utmost circumspection.
11. In the case at hand, the learned Tribunal has indeed taken the
deceased's monthly income to be Rs. 4,500/-. The claimants
pleaded that the deceased was labourer, aged about 50 years
and was earning Rs. 15,000/- per month, but they could not
produce any documentary proof to substantiate their claim;
therefore, it would be proper to take the deceased's monthly
income of Rs.9,960/- as per the Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages
Notification issued by the office of the Labour Commissioner,
Chhattisgarh for unskilled labour. Therefore, to that extent the
impugned award needs to be modified.
12. 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.
No.
Heads Compensation awarded
by the Tribunal
Compensation awarded
by this Court
1 Rs. 4,500x12 = 54,000/- Rs. 9960x12 = 1,19,520/-
Income
2. Future
prospect
(+)25% (i.e. 13,500) =
(+)25% (i.e. 29,880) =
67,500
1,49,400
3. (-) 1/3 (i.e. 22,500) =
Deduction
(-) 1/3 (i.e. 49,800) =
45,000/-
99,600/-
4. Multiplier (x) 13 = 5,85,000/- (x) 13 = 12,94,800/-
5. Other
conventio
Rs. 1,65,000/-
[16500+16500+(44000x3
Rs. 1,65,000/-
[16500+16500+(44000x3)]
1 (2017) 16 SCC 680
2 (2009) 6 SCC 121
3 (2018) 18 SCC 130

4
nal heads )]
Total Rs. 7,50,000/- Rs. 14,59,800/-
13. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of
Rs.7,50,000/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to
Rs.14,59,800/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of
Rs.7,50,000/-, the appellants are held entitled for an additional
amount of Rs.7,09,800/- . The additional amount of
compensation shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the
date of filing of the appeal before this Court i.e. 12.08.2024 till
its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award
shall remain intact.
14. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed and the impugned
award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above.
15. 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
H.L. Sahu