SMT. SANTOSHI DEWANGAN vs ANIL KUMAR SATNAMI

1

CGHC010275862023 2026:CGHC:46995
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MAC No. 1486 of 2023
1 - Smt. Santoshi Dewangan W/o Late Horilal Dewangan Aged About 45
Years R/o Village Ranigaon, P.S. Ratanpur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.
2 - Smt. Kiran Dewangan, W/o Late Mohan Dewangan Aged About 19 Years
PRASHANT
DEWANGAN
R/o Ranigaon, P.S. Ratanpur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.
... Appellants
Digitally signed
by PRASHANT
DEWANGAN
Date: 2026.11.05
17:52:08 +0530
versus
1 - Anil Kumar Satnami S/o Rajesh Kumar, Aged About 27 Years R/o Village
Sendari, P.S. Koni, District Bilaspur Chhattigsarh. (Driver Of Vehicle Car
Bearing Registration No. C.G. 10, N. 3583)
2 - Rajkumar Sahu S/o Shri Manjhiram Sahu, Aged About 36 Years R/o Naya
Basti, Mannadol, Tifra, P.S. Civil Line, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. (Owner
Of Vehicle Car Bearing Registration No. C.G. 10, N. 3583)
3 - United India Insurance Company Limited, Through Its Branch Manager,
Address First Floor, Infront Of Rajeev Plaza, P.S. Tarbahar, Gurukripa Tower,
Second Floor, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. (Insurance Company Of Vehicle
Car Bearing Registration No. C.G. 10, N. 3583)
... Respondent(s)
For Appellants : Ms. Pragya Pandey, Advocate
For Respondent No.3 : Mr. Raj Awasthi, Advocate
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal
Judgment on Board
( 05/11/2026 )
1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
(for short the "Act of 1988") has been preferred by the

2
appellants/claimants seeking enhancement of the amount of
compensation, challenging the impugned award dated
11/04/2023, passed in Claim Case No. 268/22, whereby the
learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of
Rs.19,84,880/- as compensation for the death of Mohan
Dewangan, who died in a road accident which took place on
15/01/2022.
2. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the learned
Claims Tribunal has erred in awarding inadequate
compensation, having regard to the facts and circumstances of
the case. It is contended that the learned Claims Tribunal has
wrongly assessed the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.
9,300/-, whereas the deceased was a skilled driver and was also
engaged in part-time employment at Amigos Bar, Agrasen
Chowk, earning a monthly income of Rs. 25,000/-. She further
submits that the compensation awarded under the conventional
heads is also on the lower side. It is, therefore, prayed that the
instant appeal be allowed and the compensation awarded by the
learned Claims Tribunal be suitably enhanced.
3. Learned counsel for respondent No.3/insurance company would
submit that the Claims Tribunal after appreciating oral and
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.
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. The learned Claims Tribunal has rightly assessed the monthly
income of the deceased at Rs. 9,300/-, which appears to be just
and proper, as there is no cogent evidence on record to
establish that the deceased was employed as a driver. Further,
no driving license of the deceased was produced before the

3
Tribunal. In the absence of any such evidence, the learned
Claims Tribunal has rightly treated the deceased as an
unskilled worker on the date of the accident and assessed his
monthly income accordingly. The assessment of income,
therefore, calls for no interference.
6. Further, the learned Claims Tribunal, considering that the
deceased was married and aged about 24 years at the time of
the accident and having regard to the number of claimants (2),
added 40% towards future prospects to the income of the
deceased, deducted one-third (1/3) of the income towards the
personal and living expenses of the deceased and applied
multiplier of 18, which is found to be just and proper.
7. However, under the conventional heads, the learned Tribunal
has awarded only Rs. 1,10,000/- (Rs. 40,000/- × 2 + Rs.
15,000/- + Rs. 15,000/-). Since the accident occurred on
15.01.2022, the claimants are entitled to a 10% enhancement
under the conventional heads, in accordance with law.
Accordingly, the amount payable under the said heads is
enhanced to Rs. 1,21,000/- (Rs. 44,000/- × 2 + Rs. 16,500/- +
Rs. 16,500/-). To that extent, the impugned award warrants
modification by enhancing the compensation under the
conventional heads.
8. 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
1 (2017) 16 SCC 680
2 (2009) 6 SCC 121
3 (2018) 18 SCC 130

4
No. awarded by the
awarded by this
Tribunal
Court
1 Income Rs. 9,300/- x
Rs. 9,300 x 12 =
12=1,11,600/-
1,11,600/-
2. Future
(+)40% (i.e. Rs.
(+)40% (i.e. Rs.
prospect
44,640) = 1,56,240/-
44,640) = 1,56,240/-
3. Deduction (-) 1/3 (i.e. 52,080) =
(-) 1/3 (i.e. 52,080) =
1,04,160/-
1,04,160/-
4. Multiplier (x) 18 = 18,74,880/- (x) 18 = 18,74,880/-
5 Other
Rs. 1,10,000/-
Rs. 1,21,000/-
conventional
(40,000 x 2
(44,000 x 2+
heads
+15,000+15,000)
16,500+16,500)
Total Rs. 19,84,880/- Rs. 19,95,880/-
9. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of
Rs.19,84,880/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to
Rs.19,95,880/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs.
19,84,880/-, the appellants are held entitled for an additional
amount of Rs. 11,000 /-. The additional amount of
compensation shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the
date of the filing of the claim application before the Tribunal till
its realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award
shall remain intact.
10. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed and the impugned
award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above.
11. 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