VASHUDEV SAHU vs BADRINATH VARMA

1
Digitally signed
by SHUBHAM
SINGH
RAGHUVANSHI
Date:
2026.11.05
15:54:19 +0530
SHUBHAM
SINGH
RAGHUVANSHI

CGHC010186272025 2026:CGHC:46930
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MAC No. 1087 of 2025
1 - Vashudev Sahu S/o Late Daani Ram Sahu Aged About 62
Years R/o Village Dataan Ward No. 9 Palari P.S. Palari Distt.-
Balodabazar Bhatapara (C.G.)
2 - Narottam Sahu S/o Vashudev Sahu Aged About 40 Years R/o
Village Dataan Ward No. 9 Palari P.S. Palari Distt.- Balodabazar
Bhatapara (C.G.)
3 - Purushottam S/o Vashudev Sahu Aged About 38 Years R/o
Village Dataan Ward No. 9 Palari P.S. Palari Distt.- Balodabazar
Bhatapara (C.G.)
... Appellants
versus
1 - Badrinath Varma S/o Ashok Kumar Varma Aged About 25
Years R/o Near Shiv Mandir Daganiya Raipur City Distt. Raipur
(C.G.) (Driver Of Motorcycle No. C.G.04 N.G. 8231)
2 - Punaram Painkra S/o Madan Singh Pinkra Aged About 31

2
Years R/o Near Shiv Mandir Daganiya Raipur City Distt. Raipur
(C.G.) (Owner Of Motorcycle No. C.G. 04 N.G. 8231)
3 - Bajaj Alliance General Insurance Company Limited Through
Divional Manager Divisional Office- Mobil Mahal, Vidhansabha
Road, Pandri, Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) (Insurer Of Offending
Vehicle)
--- Respondent(s)
For Appellants : Ms. Prachi Singh, Advocate
For Respondents No.1 & 2 : Mr. Ankush Soni, Advocate
For Respondent No.3 : Mr. Sangeet Kumar Kushwaha,
Advocate
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal
Order 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
appellants/claimants seeking enhancement of the amount
of compensation, challenging the impugned award dated
29.01.2025, passed in Claim Case No.1037/2023 by
th
learned 14 Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Raipur (CG), whereby the learned Claims Tribunal has
awarded a total sum of Rs.7,68,681/- as compensation for
the death of Kunti Sahu who was aged about 63 years and
died in a road accident which took place on 31.10.2023.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the
learned Claims Tribunal has erred in awarding a lesser
amount of compensation in the facts of the case. The
Claims Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased

3
on the lower side, which needs to be enhanced. The
compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal may
suitably be enhanced. Further, at the time of the accident,
the age of the deceased was 58 years as per her Voter ID,
but the Claims Tribunal has not considered the same and
has held her age to be 63 years.
3. Learned Counsel appearing for Respondents No.1 & 2
submits that at the time of accident the vehicle was insured
with Respondent No.3, therefore, Respondents No.1 & 2 are
not liable to pay any amount of compensation.
4. Learned counsel for respondent No. 3 / Insurance Company
would submit that the Claims Tribunal, after appreciating
the oral and documentary evidence available on record, has
rightly awarded the compensation and has also rightly held
the age of the deceased to be 63 years. Hence, the
compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is just and
proper and requires no interference.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered
their rival submissions made herein-above and went
through the records with utmost circumspection.
6. As there is no document to show that the deceased was
aged about 58 years at the time of the accident, i.e., on
31.10.2023, the Claims Tribunal, on the basis of the
findings recorded by the Police, recorded the age of the
deceased to be 63 years, which, in the considered opinion
of this Court, is proper and requires no interference.
7. In the case at hand, it is true that the learned Tribunal has
taken the monthly income of the deceased to be
Rs.10,000/-, which ought to be Rs.10,100/- as per the
Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the
office of Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh, to that extent

4
the impugned award needs to be modified.
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 Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation &
2
Ors and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu
3
Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors , this Court is computing the
compensation as below:-
Sr.
Heads Compensation
Compensation
No.
awarded by the
awarded by this
Tribunal
Court
1 Income Rs. 10000 x 12 =
Rs. 10100 x 12 =
1,20,000/-
1,21,200/-
2. Future
prospect NA NA
3. Deduction (-) 1/3 (i.e. 40000)
(-) 1/3 (i.e. 40400)
= 80,000/-
= 80,800/-
4. Multiplier (x) 7 =
(x) 7 =
5,60,000/-
5,65,600/-
5 Other
Rs. 1,80,000/- Rs. 1,80,000/-
conventional
(18000+18000+144
heads
000)
6 Treatment
Rs.28,681/- Rs.28,681/-
Expenses
Total Rs. 7,68,681/- Rs. 7,74,281/-
9. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of
compensation of Rs.7,68,681/- awarded by the Claims
Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.7,74,281/-. Hence, after
deducting the amount of Rs.7,68,681/-, the appellants are
1 (2017) 16 SCC 680
2 (2009) 6 SCC 121
3 (2018) 18 SCC 130

5
held entitled for an additional amount of Rs.5,600/-. The
additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @
6% per annum from filing of the claim application before
the Claims 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
-Shubham