RATHRAM KARSH vs RAMKUMAR

1


2026:CGHC:12099
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MAC No. 544 of 2021
1. Rathram Karsh Son Of Kuhkuram Karsh Aged About 43 Years
Resident Of Village Balouda (Hasua), P.S. Gidhouri Tundra, District
Baloda Bazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh., District : Balodabazar-
Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh
2. Padma Bai Wife Of Rathram Karsh Aged About 40 Years Resident
Of Village Balouda (Hasua), P.S. Gidhouri Tundra, District Baloda
Bazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh.
... Appellants
versus
1. Ramkumar Son Of Parsuram Rahi Aged About 24 Years Resident Of
Tiwaripara, Kharoud, P.S. Shivrinarayan, District Janjgir Champa
Chhattisgarh. (Driver Vehicle), District : Janjgir-Champa,
Chhattisgarh
2. Rakesh Dubey Son Of Bijendra Dubey Aged About 48 Years
Resident Of Tiwaripara, Kharoud, P.S. Shivrinarayan, District Janjgir
Champa Chhattisgarh. (Owner Vehicle)
3. Santosh Kumar Gupta Son Of Sonuram Gupta Resident Of
Tiwaripara, Kharoud, P.S. Shivrinarayan, District Janjgir Champa
Chhattisgarh. (Owner Of Tractor Trolley)
4. United India Insurance Company Ltd. Branch Paras Collection,
Gurudwara Opposite Side (S.B.I.) Station Road Kumhari, District
Raipur Chhattisgarh. (Insurer)
... Respondent(s)

2
For Appellants : Mr. Anand Kesharwani, Advocate
For Respondent No. 4 : Mr. Pravin Kumar Tulsyan, Advocate
Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey
Judgment On Board
13.03.2026
1) This appeal has been preferred by the appellants/ claimants
under Section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 for enhancement
of compensation assailing the award passed by learned Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, Baloda Bazar, District Baloda Bazar
(C.G.) passed in Claim Case No. 80/2016 dated 24.02.2018,
whereby learned Tribunal has granted compensation to the tune
of Rs. 6,79,800/- with interest @ 9% per annum on account of
death of Paleshwar Karsh.
2) Facts of the present case are that on 27.12.2014 at around
07:15 pm, the motorcycle of the deceased Paleshwar Karsh
was dashed by offending truck bearing Registration No. CG-04-
KE-0414. In the said accident, Paleshwar Karsh sustained
grievous injuries and succumbed to death. Claimants, who are
the parents of deceased filed claim application under Section
166 of the Motor Vehicle Act claiming therein compensation to
the tune of Rs. 51,05,000/-. They pleaded that the deceased
was aged 23 years and was earning Rs. 7,000/- per month.
Learned Tribunal framed issues ; parties led evidence and
thereafter award impugned was passed.

3
3) Learned counsel for the appellants submits that learned
Tribunal has assessed the notional income of the deceased to
be Rs. 4,000/- per month which is not in consonance with the
minimum wage matrix applicable in the State of Chhattisgarh at
the relevant time. He further submits that learned Tribunal has
not granted adequate compensation on conventional heads. He
would prays for enhancement in the compensation.
4) On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the Insurance
Company would oppose. He submits that claimants failed to
prove the income of the deceased by leading cogent evidence
and therefore, the learned Tribunal assessed it Rs. 4,000/- per
month. He submits that learned Tribunal has awarded just and
proper compensation and this appeal deserves to be dismissed.
5) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
record with utmost circumspection.
6) Admittedly, age of the deceased was 23 years and pleaded
income was Rs. 7,000/-, but the claimants could not prove the
income of the deceased by leading cogent evidence. In
absence of evidence, the learned Tribunal should have applied
minimum wages matrix. The minimum wage payable to an
unskilled laborer in month of December, 2014 was Rs. 5,500/-
per month and learned Tribunal should have taken that figure
while computing income of the deceased. The Tribunal further
committed error while granting a fix sum of Rs. 77,000/- towards

4
loss of consortium, loss of estate and funeral expenses, thus,
the compensation requires reconsideration and the same is
being revisited herein-below:
Sr.
No
Heads Compensation
awarded by Tribunal
Compensation
awarded by this
Court
.
1. Annual Income Rs. 48,000/-
Rs. 66,000/-
(@Rs. 4,000 pm)
(@Rs. 5,500 pm)
2. Future Prospect Rs. 19,200/-
Rs. 26,400/-
(@40%)
(@40%)
3. Deduction Rs. 33,600/-
(@1/2)
Rs. 46,200/-
(@1/2)
Multiplier Rs. 6,04,800/-
4.
Rs. 8,31,600/-
(@18)
(@18)
5. Loss of Estate Rs. 30,000/- Rs. 18,000/-
6. Funeral expenses Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 18,000/-
7. Loss of Consortium Rs. 30,000/-
Rs. 96,000/-
(love and affection)
(two claimants)
TOTAL Rs. 6,79,800/- Rs. 9,63,600/-
7) Accordingly, the amount of compensation of Rs. 6,79,800/-
awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 9,63,600/- .
Hence, the appellants are entitled for an additional amount of
Rs. 2,83,800/- . The Insurance Company is directed to make
payment of compensation as enhanced by this Court assessed
herein-above within period of 60 days. Rest of the terms of the
award shall remain intact. The appellants shall not be entitled to

5
receive any interest for the period of delay caused in filing this
appeal.
8) Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part and the impugned
award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above.
Sd/-
(Rakesh Mohan Pandey)
JUDGE
Manish