JANKI BAI vs SEWAKRAM

1

CGHC010098672025 2026:CGHC:46229

NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MAC No. 650 of 2025
1 - Janki Bai W/o Late Sampat Lal Aged About 38 Years R/o
Village- Dudhniya, Katgodhi, PS & Tehsil- Sonhat, District Korea,
C.G.
2 - Shriram S/o Late Sampat Lal Aged About 23 Years R/o Village-
Dudhniya, Katgodhi, Ps And Tehsil- Sonhat, District Korea, C.G.
3 - Raju Kumar S/o Late Sampat Lal Aged About 20 Years R/o
Village- Dudhniya, Katgodhi, Ps And Tehsil- Sonhat, District
Korea, C.G.
... Appellants
versus
1 - Sewakram S/o Harilal Singh Aged About 24 Years R/o Village-
Sonari, Ps And Tehsil- Sonhat, District Korea, C.G. ( Owner And
Driver )
2 - Branch Manager, Cholamandlam M.S. General Insurance
Company Limited, Ward No. 25 (Guru Govind Singh Ward), 2nd
Floor, Simran Towers, Pandri Road, Opp Lic Building, Raipur,
District- Raipur, C.G. ( Insurance Company)
Digitally signed by
VIJAY BHARATRAO
PEKDE
Date: 2026.11.02
17:02:21 +0530

2
... Respondents
For Appellants : Mr. Shobhit Koshta, Advocate.
For Respondent No. 1 : None
For Respondent No.2 : Mr. S.K. Kushwaha Advocate.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal
Order on Board
(02.11.2026)
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
28.11.2024, passed in Motor Accident Claim Case
No.88/2023, whereby the learned Claims Tribunal has
awarded a total sum of Rs.13,94,880/- as compensation for
the death of Late Sampat Lal, who died in a road accident
which took place on 19.10.2023.
2. Brief facts of the case are that on 19.10.2023, deceased
Sampat Lal was proceeding on his bicycle from Village
Dudhaniya to Village Tejra to visit the house of his son-in-
law. When he reached near Village Telaidhar Jampara,
respondent No.1/the driver of motorcycle bearing
registration No. CG-16-CP-1854, driving his motorcycle in a

3
rash and negligent manner, came from the opposite
direction and dashed against the deceased, as a result of
which Sampat Lal sustained grievous injuries and died on
the spot. The offending vehicle was owned by respondent
No.1-Sewak Ram and was insured with respondent No.2-
Cholamandlam M.S. General Insurance Company Ltd.
3. A claim petition was filed by the appellants/claimants who
happen to be the legal heirs (Wife and two son) of the
deceased claiming a compensation of Rs.44,00,000/- inter
alia pleading that the deceased at the relevant time was
aged about 39 years, he was doing Mason and agricultural
work and used to earn Rs.15,000/- per month.
4. After evaluating the evidence available on record, the
Tribunal has awarded the compensation of Rs.13,94,880/-
along with interest @ 6% per annum in favour of the
appellants/claimants taking the monthly income of the
deceased at Rs.7,410/- per month and Rs.88,920/- per
annum, taking 40% towards future prospect, applying the
multiplier of 15, deducting 1/3 towards his personal
expenses and exonerating the insurance company having
found the breach of policy condition of driving license.
Hence, this appeal for enhancement.

4
5. 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 doing mason and agricultural work and
was earning Rs.15,000/- - Rs.20,000/- per month, however,
the learned Tribunal only assessed the monthly income of
the deceased at Rs.7,410/-, which is not justified. He further
submits that under the conventional heads also the learned
Claims Tribunal has awarded meager compensation, which
needs to be enhanced suitably. It has been also submitted
that the learned Tribunal has held that there was a breach of
the policy conditions of driving license and has consequently
exonerated the Insurance Company from its liability,
therefore, an appropriate direction for pay and recover may
kindly be issued against the Insurance Company.
6. None for respondent No. 1.
7. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2/Insurance
Company submits that the learned Claims Tribunal, after
appreciating oral and documentary evidence, has rightly
exonerated the insurance company upon finding the breach
of policy condition of driving license and passed the

5
impugned award, which does not call for any interference by
this Court.
8. I have heard learned counsel for the appellants and
respondent No.2, considered their rival submissions made
herein-above and went through the records with utmost
circumspection.
9. In the present case, the appellants/claimants pleaded before
the Claims Tribunal that deceased Sampat Lal was earning
Rs.15,000/- - Rs.20,000/- per month by doing mason and
agricultural work, but the learned Claims Tribunal assessed
the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.7,410/-. As
regards the monthly income of the deceased, the claimants
did not produce any cogent and reliable evidence which
could establish that the deceased at the time of accident
was doing mason and agricultural work. Considering that
the accident took place on 19.10.2023, it would be proper to
take his monthly income of Rs.10,100/- 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
10. The learned claims Tribunal, considering the nature of job of
deceased (self employed) at the time of accident
19.10.2023, the fact that he was married aged 39 years and
the number of dependents (03), has rightly taken future
prospect of 40%, deducted 1/3 towards personal expenses
and applied multiplier of 15 respectively.
11. The learned claims Tribunal has awarded an amount of
Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate, Rs.15,000/- towards
funeral expenses and Rs.1,20,000/- (40,000x3) to
appellants towards loss of consortium (spousal consortium
to appellant No.1 and parental consortium to appellant Nos.
2 & 3), which in the facts and circumstances of the case,
considering the date of accident 19.10.2023 and the case
law governing the issue, is not found to be justified and
needs to be modified suitably.
12. 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 @
1(2017) 16 SCC 680
2(2009) 6 SCC 121

7
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.7,410 x 12 =
Rs. 10,100 x 12 =
Rs.88,920/-
Rs.1,21,200/-
2. Future
prospect
(+)40% (i.e.
Rs.35,568/-) =
(+)40% (i.e.
Rs.48,480/-) =
Rs.1,24,488/-
Rs.1,69,680/-
3. Deduction (-) 1/3 (i.e.
Rs.41,496/-) =
(-) 1/3 (i.e.
Rs.56,560/-) =
Rs.82,992/-
Rs.1,13,120/-
4. Multiplier (x) 15 =
Rs.12,44,880/-
(x) 15 =
Rs.16,96,800/-
5 Towards
consortium
to all 03
claimants
Rs.1,20,000 /- Rs. 48,000 x 3 =
Rs.1,44,000/-
6. Towards
Loss of
Estate.
Rs.15,000/- Rs.18,000/-
7. Towards
funeral
expenses.
Rs.15,000/- Rs.18,000/-
Total Rs.13,94,880/- Rs.18,76,800/-
13. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of
compensation of Rs.13,94,880/- awarded by the Claims
Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.18,76,800/-. Hence, after
deducting the amount of Rs.13,94,880/-, the appellants are
held entitled for an additional amount of Rs.4,81,920/- . The
additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @
3(2018) 18 SCC 130

8
6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim application
before the Claims Tribunal till its realization.
14. As prayed by the appellants and in view of decision of
Hon’ble Suprme Court in the matter of Rama Bai Vs. Amit
Minerals through Incharge Officer/Competent Officer
4
and Another governing the issue of breach of policy
condition of driving license & pay and recover of amount of
compensation, it is directed that the amount of
compensation shall be paid by respondent No.2/Insurance
Company in the first instance, with liberty to recover the
same from respondent No.1/owner & driver of the offending
vehicle, in accordance with law. Rest of the conditions of the
impugned award shall remain intact.
15. In the result, the appeal filed by the appellants/claimants is
partly allowed and the impugned award is modified to the
extent as indicated herein-above.
16. 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-
4 (2025) SCC OnLine SC 2067

9
ordination of Secretary, Legal Aid of the concerned area
wherein the claimants resides.
Sd/-
(Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal)
Judge
pekde