SMT. PARVATI DAS VAISHNAV vs KALVINDER SINGH

1

CGHC010229102025 2026:CGHC:45478
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MAC No. 1228 of 2025
1 - Smt. Parvati Das Vaishnav W/o. Late Shri Govardhan Das
Vaishnav Aged About 44 Years R/o. Ravindranath Tagore Ward, Near
Tartarni Mandir, Jagdalpur, District - Bastar (C.G.) (Claimant)
... Appellant
versus
1 - Kalvinder Singh S/o. Late Shri Ajit Singh Aged About 55 Years
Profession Driver, R/o. Gundadhur Ward, P.S. Bodhghat, Jagdalpur,
District - Bastar (C.G.) (Driver)
2 - Sukhdev Singh S/o. Late Shri Mohan Singh Business -
Transporter, R/o. Behind Bastar Diesel, Danteshwari Ward,
Jagdalpur, District - Bastar (C.G.) (Owner)
3 - The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Through Branch Manager,
Branch Office, Hotel Lakshman Avenue, Moorti Line, Jagdalpur,
District - Bastar (C.G.) (Insurer)
... Respondents
For Appellant/Claimant : Mr. Shikhar Shukla, Advocate.
For Respondents No. 1 & 2 : None.
For Respondent No. 3 : Mr. Hanuman Prasad Agrawal , Adv.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal
Judgment on Board
(28.10.2026)
1. Heard on I.A. No. 01/2025, application for condonation of
delay.
Digitally signed
by HEERA LAL
SAHU
Date:
2026.10.28
16:30:47 +0530

2
2. Upon due consideration and for the reasons stated in the
application, I.A. No. 01/2025 is allowed. Delay of 34 days in
filing the appeal is condoned.
3. Also heard on admission.
4. Admit.
5. With the consent of both the parties, the matter was heard
finally.
6. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act,
1988 (for short the "Act of 1988") has been preferred by the
appellant/claimant seeking enhancement of the amount of
compensation, challenging the impugned award dated
29.01.2025, passed in Claim Case No.232/2023, whereby the
learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of
Rs.14,30,800/- as compensation for the death of Late
Sandeep Kumar Das (25 years old), who died in a road
accident which took place on 30.04.2023.
7. 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 as
Rs.9,000/- per month, whereas the minimum wages were Rs.
9,960/- per month on the date of the accident i.e.
30.04.2023; therefore, the income of the deceased should be
considered on the higher side. The Tribunal has also awarded
a lesser amount under other conventional heads, which
needs to be enhanced. Therefore, the instant appeal should
be allowed, and the compensation awarded by the Claims
Tribunal may suitably be enhanced.
8. Learned counsel for respondent No. 3/insurance company
supported the impugned award.
9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and went

3
through the records with utmost circumspection.
10. In the case at hand, the learned Tribunal has indeed taken
the monthly income of the deceased to be Rs. 9,000/-.
According to the claimant, the deceased was aged about 25
years, unmarried and was working as a painter and putty
worker; he used to earn Rs. 700/- per day from his work, but
no documents have been produced in support of this fact,
hence, it would proper to take his monthly income of
Rs.9,960/- as per the Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages
Notification issued by the office of Labour Commissioner,
Chhattisgarh for unskilled labour. Furthermore, in other
conventional heads the Tribunal has granted only
Rs.70,000/- which ought to be Rs.84,000/-, to that extent
the impugned award needs to be modified.
11. 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. 9,960 x 12 =
1,08,000/-
1,19,520/-
2. Future
prospect
(+)40% (i.e. Rs.
(+)40% (i.e. Rs.
43,200) =
1,51,200/-
47,808) =
1,67,328/-
3. Deduction (-) 1/2 (i.e. Rs.
75,600) = 75,600/-
(-) 1/2 (i.e. Rs.
83,664) =
83,664 /-
4. Multiplier (x) 18 = 13,60,800/- (x) 18 =
15,05,952/-
1 (2017) 16 SCC 680
2 (2009) 6 SCC 121
3 (2018) 18 SCC 130

4
5 Other
conventional
heads
Rs. 70,000/-
[15,000+15,000+40,
Rs. 84,000/-
[18,000+18,000+
000]
48,000]
Total Rs. 14,30,800/- Rs. 15,89,952/-
12. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of
compensation of Rs.14,30,800/- awarded by the Claims
Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.15,89,952/-. Hence, after
deducting the amount of Rs.14,30,800/-, the
appellant/claimant is held entitled for an additional amount
of Rs.1,59,152/- . 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.
13. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed and the impugned
award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above.
14. 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
H.L. Sahu