RAJMAN GOTA vs JAGESHWAR SAHU

1

CGHC010149952023 2026:CGHC:45341

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MAC No. 742 of 2023
1 - Rajman Gota S/o Late Sukaluram Gota Aged About 41 Years R/o
Uparpara, Tumsanar Thana - Aamabeda, and District North Baster -
Kanker, Chhattisgarh.
2 - Sagotin Gota W/o Rajman Gota Aged About 39 Years R/o Uparpara,
Tumsanar Thana - Aamabeda, And District North Baster - Kanker,
Chhattisgarh.
3 - Minor Bisru Gota S/o Rajman Gota Aged About 15 Years Minor through
Legal Guardian Father Rajman Gota Appellant No. 1, R/o Uparpara,
Tumsanar Thana - Aamabeda, and District North Baster - Kanker,
Chhattisgarh ... Appellants
versus
1 - Jageshwar Sahu S/o Dhannu Ram Sahu Aged About 31 Years R/o
Village Kodagaon, Tikarapara, Hall Mukam Villagae - Kodejunga, Thana -
Kanker, District Kanker Chhattisgarh, (Driver of the Offending Vehicle
Matador No. C.G.04 / J.C./ 9378).
2 - M/s New Bharat Traders Pro. Mohd. Firoj, S/o Yahya Bhai, R/o Main
Road Kanker Thana - Kanker, District Kanker Chhattisgarh, (Owner of the
Offending Vehicle Matador No. C.G.04 / J.C./ 9378).
3 - The Oriental Insurance Company Limited Branch Office, Near - Adarsh
Ball Mandir Main Road Dhamtari District Dhamtari Chhattisgar, (Insurer of
the Offending Vehicle Matador No. C.G.04 / J.C./ 9378)
... Respondents
For the appellants : Mr. Arjun Lal Singraul, Advocate
For Respondent no.3 : Mr. Praveen Tulsyan, Advocate
(Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal)
Order on Board
27.10.2026
1. This appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short

2
“MV Act”) has been filed seeking enhancement of compensation, challenging
the impugned award dated 30.07.2022 passed by Ist Additional Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, North Bastar, Kanker in Claim Case No.
47/2021 whereby a total compensation of Rs . 10,28,200/- has been
awarded.
2 . As per the facts pleaded in claim application filed under Section 166
of the MV Act, deceased Dasruram Gota died in a motor accident took
place on 06.11.2020 due to rash and negligent driving of respondent no.1
who drove the offending Vehicle Metador No. C.G. 04-JC/9378. Appellants
1 & 2 are parents and appellant no. 3 is minor brother of deceased. They
being legal heirs have filed claim application u/s 166 of the M.V. Act,
seeking a total compensation of Rs. 23,60,000/-.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the income taken by
the Tribunal is on lower side and the amounts granted under the other
conventional heads are also meagre, thereby, just compensation has not
been awarded. He prays that the appeal be allowed and the compensation
awarded by the Claims Tribunal may suitably be enhanced.
4. Learned counsel for respondent no.3/Insurer submits that just and
proper award has been passed by the Tribunal, which needs no
interference.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival
submissions and perused the record with utmost circumspection.
6. The claimants pleaded that the deceased was earning monthly
income of Rs.10,000/- by doing the job of Cleaner in vehicle. However,
the Tribunal took the income of deceased as Rs. 6000/- per month, which
seems to be on lower side. In absence of any cogent reliable evidence
regarding the nature of job and income of deceased and looking to the
prevalent market rates, it would be appropriate to take his monthly income
to be Rs.8,860/- treating him as unskilled labour as per the

3
Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages applicable at the time of accident occurred
on 06.11.2020.
7. Since the deceased was unmarried person of 18 years old and and
there are 3 claimants, following the case-law laid down by Supreme Court,
the Tribunal has rightly added 40% future prospectus, deducted one-half
towards personal expenses and applied multiplier 18 which cannot be said
to be unsustainable.
8 . The amounts granted under the other heads like loss of estate
Rs.16,500 and funeral expenses Rs.16,500/- cannot be said to be lesser.
9. As regards consortium, it appears that the claimants-mother & father
have been granted filial consortium whereas the minor brother has been left
out. Under Motor Accident Claims, the Supreme Court has established
that every individual dependent-claimant is entitled to a separate
compensation for the loss of consortium or love and affection. There are 3
claimants in this case. Thus each claimant is entitled to Rs.44,000/-
separately and the total comes to Rs.1,32000/-- under this specific head.
10. Thus, in the light of the aforesaid discussion and in view of the
decisions of the Supreme Court rendered in National Insurance Company
Ltd. Versus Pranay Sethi (2017) 16 SCC 680 ; Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi
Transport Corporation (2009) 6 SCC 121 and Magma General Insurance Co.
Ltd. Versus Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram (2018) 18 SCC 130 , this Court is
computing the compensation as below :
Sl.No . Heads Compensation
awarded by the
Tribunal
Compensation
awarded by this
Court
1. Total loss of
dependency
9,07,200/-

Rs.8,860 X 12 =
1,06,320/- plus
Future Prospectus-
40% i.e., 42,528/- =
1,48,848/- minus
one-half (½)
deduction of
personal expenses
i.e., 74,424/- =

4
74,424 x 18
multiplier =
13,39,632/-
2. Loss of estate 16,500/- 16,500/-

3. Funeral expenses 16,500/- 16,500/-
4. Loss of consortium 44000 x 2
44000 x 3 claimants
1,32,000/-
88,000/-


Total Rs. 10,28,200/- 15,04,632/-
11. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of Rs.
10,28,200/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to
Rs.15,04,632/- Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs. 10,28,200/- the
appellants are held entitled for an additional sum of Rs. 4,76,432/-. The
additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 6% per annum
from the date of filing claim application before the Tribunal till its
realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain
intact.
12. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed in part and the impugned award
is modified to the extent as indicated hereinabove.
Sd/-
Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal
Judge
Rao
Digitally
signed by
ALLENA
ANNAJEE
RAO
Date:
2026.10.28
16:31:28
+0530
ALLENA
ANNAJEE
RAO