LALITA BAI vs GAJJU KUMAR SAHU

1
Digitally signed
by SHUBHAM
SINGH
RAGHUVANSHI
Date: 2026.09.03
11:13:14 +0530
SHUBHAM
SINGH
RAGHUVANSHI

CGHC010115632021 2026:CGHC:38738
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MAC No. 597 of 2021
1 - Lalita Bai W/o Late Ghasiram Aged About 40 Years Caste
Patel, R/o Village Bokramuda, Police Station Baradwar, Tahsil
Sakti, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh ...........Claimant
2 - Hemant Kumar S/o Ghasiram Aged About 20 Years Caste
Patel, R/o Village Bokramuda, Police Station Baradwar, Tahsil
Sakti, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh ...........Claimant
3 - Hema Kumari D/o Ghasiram Aged About 15 Years Appellant
No. 03, Is Minor Through Guardian Mother Lalita Bai, Caste
Patel, R/o Village Bokramuda, Police Station Baradwar, Tahsil
Sakti, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh ...........Claimant
Hem Kumar S/o Ghasiram Aged About 13 Years Appellant
4 -
No. 04, Is Minor Through Guardian Mother Lalita Bai, Caste
Patel, R/o Village Bokramuda, Police Station Baradwar, Tahsil
Sakti, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh ...........Claimant
5 - Purain Bai W/o Late Gurbaru Ram Aged About 60 Years
Caste Patel, R/o Village Bokramuda, Police Station Baradwar,
Tahsil Sakti, District Janjgir Champa
Chhattisgarh ...........Claimant
.. Appellant
versus

2
1 - Gajju Kumar Sahu S/o Ramkumar R/o Village Sarkho,
Choki Naila, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh ...........Driver
2 - Suresh Kumar Rathore, S/o Kapilnath Rathore, aged about
40 Years, R/o Village Birgahani, Champa, District Janjgir
Champa Chhattisgarh ...........Owner
2A - Prakash Rathore S/o Late Suresh Kumar Rathore Aged
About 28 Years R/o Village Birgahani, Champa, District Janjgir
Champa Chhattisgarh
3 - Branch Manager National Insurance Company Limited, 13
Minu Complex, Kosabari Korba District Korba
Chhattisgarh ...........Insurance Company

--- Respondent(s)
For Appellants : Mr. Deepak Kumar Singh,
Advocate
For Respondents No.1, 2 & 2A : None
For Respondents No.3 : Mr. P K Tulsyan, Advocate
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal
Judgment on Board
(01.09.2026)
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
25.01.2019, passed in Claim Case No.35/2017 by learned
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sakti, District Janjgir-
Champa (CG), whereby the learned Claims Tribunal has
awarded a total sum of Rs.07,38,750/- as compensation for
death of Ghasiram Patel who was aged about 44 years and
died in a road accident which took place on 23.02.2017.

3
2. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the
learned Claims Tribunal has erred in awarding lesser
amount of compensation in the facts of the case. The
Claims Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased
on the lower side and has also awarded lesser amount
under other conventional heads, which needs to be
enhanced. Therefore, the instant appeal be allowed and the
compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal may
suitably be enhanced.
3. Learned counsel for respondent No.3/insurance company
would submit that the Claims Tribunal after appreciating
oral and documentary evidence available on record rightly
awarded the compensation amount. Hence, the
compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is just and
proper and requires no interference.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered
their rival submissions made herein-above and went
through the records with utmost circumspection.
5. In the case at hand, true it is that the learned Tribunal has
taken the monthly income of the deceased to be Rs.4500/-,
which ought to be Rs.6,206/- as per the Chhattisgarh
Minimum Wages Notification issued by the office of Labour
Commissioner, Chhattisgarh. Furthermore, in other
conventional heads the Tribunal has granted only
Rs30,000/- which ought to be 2,30,000/-, to that extent
the impugned award needs to be modified.
6. 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 &
1 (2017) 16 SCC 680

4
2
Ors and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu
3
, this Court is computing the
Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors
compensation as below:-
Sr.
Heads Compensation
Compensation
No.
awarded by the
awarded by this
Tribunal
Court
1 Income Rs. 4500 x 12 =
Rs. 6206 x 12 =
54,000/-
74,472/-
2. Future
(+)25% (i.e. Rs.
prospect --------
18,618) = 93,090/-
3. Deduction (-) 1/4 (i.e.
(-) 1/4 (i.e. 23272)
13500) =
= 69,818/-
40,500/-
4. Future
(+)25% (i.e. Rs.
prospect
10,125) =
--------
50,625/-
4. Multiplier (x) 14 =
(x) 14 = 9,77,452/-
7,08,750/-
5 Other
Rs. 30,000/- Rs. 2,30,000/-
conventional
(15000+15000+200
heads
000)
Total Rs. 7,38,750/- Rs. 12,07,452/-
7. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the compensation of Rs.
7,38,750/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to
Rs. 12,07,452/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs.
7,38,750/-, the appellants are held entitled to an additional
amount of Rs. 4,68,702/-. 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. Appellant No. 2 - Hemant
2 (2009) 6 SCC 121
3 (2018) 18 SCC 130

5
Kumar/claimant is also entitled to get Rs. 40,000/- out of
the amount as awarded above. The rest of the conditions of
the impugned award shall remain intact.
8. In the result, the appeal is and the
partly allowed
impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated
herein-above.
9. 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