SMT. MAMTA BAI SAHU vs DHARMENDRA NISHAD

1


CGHC010114582026 2026:CGHC:44758
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MAC No. 801 of 2026
1 - Smt. Mamta Bai Sahu Wd/o Late Pokhan Lal Sahu Aged About
34 Years R/o Bazar Para, Madeli, Police Station Kurud, Dhamtari,
District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh.
2 - Bheem Sahu S/o Late Pokhan Sahu Aged About 15 Years
Minor, Through The Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Mamta Bai
Sahu, Wd/o Late Pokhan Lal Sahu, Aged About 34 Years, R/o
Bazar Para, Madeli, Police Station Kurud, Dhamtari, District
Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh.
3 - Geeta Sahu D/o Late Pokhan Sahu Aged About 11 Years
Through The Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Mamta Bai Sahu
Wd/o Late Pokhan Lal Sahu, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Bazar
Para, Madeli, Police Station Kurud, Dhamtari, District Dhamtari,
Chhattisgarh.
4 - Smt. Prabha Bai Sahu W/o Shri Bala Ram Sahu Aged About
54 Years R/o Bazar Para, Madeli, Police Station Kurud, Dhamtari,
District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh.

2
5 - Bala Ram Sahu S/o Shri Ganesh Ram Sahu Aged About 59
Years R/o Bazar Para, Madeli, Police Station Kurud, Dhamtari,
District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh…….. (Claimants)
... Appellants
versus
1 - Dharmendra Nishad S/o Shri Radheshyam Nishad Aged About
31 Years R/o Kenwatpara, Badgaon, Post Birkoni Badgaon,
Mahasamund, District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh. ( Driver Of
The Car No. 04NZ/6799)
2 - Ramadhar Sahu S/o Shri Osit Ram Sahu R/o Ward No. 46,
Near Pani Tanki, Amlidih, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
( Owner Of The Car No. 04NZ/6799)
3 - Reliance General Insurance Company Limited Through The
Authorized Officer, Reliance General Insurance Company Limited,
Office Address No. 516 National Corporate Park, Fifth Floor, G.E.
Road, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Other Address Shop
No. 412, 413, Fourth Floor, Ravi Bhawan, Near Jai Stambh
Chowk, G.E. Road, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ( Insurer
Of The Car No. 04NZ/6799)
... Respondents
For Appellants : Mrs. Dhaneshwari Patel, Advocate.
For Respondents : None
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal
Order on Board
(15.10.2026)
1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act,
1988 (for short the "Act of 1988") has been preferred by the

3
appellants/claimants seeking enhancement of the amount of
compensation, challenging the impugned award dated
25.10.2025, passed in Claim Case No.1081/2024, whereby
the learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of
Rs.18,81,000/- as compensation for the death of Late
Pokhan Sahu, who died in a road accident which took place
on 12.09.2024.
2. Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants submits that
the impugned award passed by the learned Tribunal is on
the lower side and therefore liable to modified suitably.
Learned counsel further submits that the deceased at the
relevant time was working as Head Cook in Jai Caterers,
Raipur (CG) and was earning Rs.21,000/- per month.
However, the learned Tribunal only assessed the monthly
income of the deceased at Rs.9,000/- treating him as
unskilled labour, which is not justified. She further submits
that under the conventional heads also the learned Claims
Tribunal has awarded meager compensation, which needs
to be enhanced suitably.
3. None appeared for respondents.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the appellants and perused

4
the records including the impugned award.
5. As regards the monthly income of the deceased, though the
claimants have filed a certificate (Ex.P-14) issued and duly
signed by one Ramu Ram, claiming to be the Proprietor of
the Jai Caterers, Raipur, but they have not examined the
said Ramu Ram before the learned Tribunal to substantiate
their plea. Thus, in absence of non-examination of the said
Ramu Ram, the credibility of letter (Ex.P-14) becomes
doubtful and cannot be relied upon for determining the
income of the deceased. That apart, the claimants did not
produce any cogent and reliable evidence which could
establish the fact that the deceased at the time of accident
was skilled labour. Considering the deceased as unskilled
labourer at the time of accident i.e. 12.09.2024, it would
proper to take his monthly income of Rs.10,380/- as per the
Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the
office of Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh for unskilled
labour. Therefore, to that extent the impugned award needs
to be modified.
6. The learned Claims Tribunal, considering the nature of job
of deceased (self employed) at the time of accident
12.09.2024, the fact that he was married aged 39 years, and

5
number of claimants (05), has rightly taken future prospect
of 40%, deducted 1/4th towards personal expenses and
applied multiplier of 15 respectively along with Rs.18,000/-
towards loss of estate and Rs.18,000/- towards funeral
expenses. However, the amount of Rs.48,000/- awarded
towards parental consortium to appellant Nos. 2 & 3 and
Rs.48,000/- towards filial consortium to appellant Nos. 4 & 5
jointly, does not appear to be just and reasonable in the
facts and circumstances of the case and governing the
issue, which requires to be enhanced suitably.
7. 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 @
3
Chuhru Ram & Ors , this Court is computing the
compensation as below:-
Sr.
No.
Heads Compensation
awarded by the
Tribunal
Compensation
awarded by this
Court
1 Income Rs.9,000 x 12 =
Rs. 10,380 x 12 =
Rs.1,08,000/-
Rs.1,24,560/-
1(2017) 16 SCC 680
2(2009) 6 SCC 121
3(2018) 18 SCC 130

6
2. Future
prospect
(+)40% (i.e.
Rs.43,200/-) =
(+)40% (i.e.
Rs.49,824/-) =
Rs.1,51,200/-
Rs.1,74,384/-
3. Deduction (-) 1/4 (i.e.37,800/-)
(-) 1/4 (i.e. 43,596/-)
= Rs.1,13,400/-
= Rs.1,30,788/-
4. Multiplier (x) 15 =
Rs.17,01,000/-
(x) 15 =
Rs.19,61,820/-
5 Towards
consortium
to all 05
claimants
Rs.1,44,000 /-
(Rs.48,000 x 3)
Rs. 48,000 x 5 =
Rs.2,40,000/-
6. Towards
Loss of
Estate.
Rs.18,000/- Rs.18,000/-
7. Towards
funeral
expenses.
Rs.18,000/- Rs.18,000/-
Total Rs.18,81,000/- Rs. 22,37,820/-
8. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of
compensation of Rs.18,81,000/- awarded by the Claims
Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.22,37,820/-. Hence, after
deducting the amount of Rs.18,81,000/-, the appellants are
held entitled for an additional amount of Rs.3,56,820/- . The
additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @
6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application
before the Claims Tribunal till its realization. Rest of the
conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact.
9. In the result, the appeal filed by the appellants/claimants is
partly allowed and the impugned award is modified to the

7
extent as indicated herein-above.
10. 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
Digitally signed by
VIJAY BHARATRAO
pekde
PEKDE
Date: 2026.10.16
10:46:30 +0530