SMT. KRISHNA BAI YADAV vs BALKRISHNA YADAV

1

CGHC010118542024 2026:CGHC:46766
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MAC No. 732 of 2024
1 - Smt. Krishna Bai Yadav Wd/o Late Lakhandhar Yadav Aged About
42 Years Resident Of Mahamayapara Ratanpur, Dist. Bilaspur, C.G.
Present Address- Village Polmi, Tahsil And Police Station- Pali, Dist.
Korba, C.G.
2 - Ashish Kumar Yadav S/o Late Lakhandhar Yadav Aged About 23
Years Resident Of Mahamayapara Ratanpur, Dist. Bilaspur, C.G.
Present Address- Village Polmi, Tahsil And Police Station- Pali, Dist.
Korba, C.G.
3 - Ku. Akasnsha Yadav D/o Late Lakhandhar Yadav Aged About 21
Years Resident Of Mahamayapara Ratanpur, Dist. Bilaspur, C.G.
Present Address- Village Polmi, Tahsil And Police Station- Pali, Dist.
Korba, C.G.
4 - Ayush Yadav S/o Late Lakhandhar Yadav Aged About 17 Years
Minor Represented Through The Mother Smt. Krishna Bai Yadav,
Resident Of Mahamayapara Ratanpur, Dist. Bilaspur, C.G. Present
Address- Village Polmi, Tahsil And Police Station- Pali, Dist. Korba,
C.G.
... Appellants
versus
1 - Balkrishna Yadav S/o Late Jamuna Prasad Yadav Aged About 28
Years Resident Of Mahamayapara Ratanpur, Ward No. 3, Dist.
Bilaspur, C.G. (Driver Of Vehicle Cg-12-Ay-4514)
2 - Shivcharan Yadav S/o Shri Ramlal Yadav Resident Of Village-
Polmi, Post Office- Silli, Tahsil Pali, Dist. Korba, C.G. (Owner Of
Vehicle Cg-12-Ay-4514)
Digitally signed
by HEERA LAL
SAHU
Date:
2026.11.05
10:09:26
+0530

2
3 - The Branch Manager Tata A.I.G. General Insurance Company
Limited, Branch Office, No. T-B, Fourth Floor, Gwalani Chamber,
Vyapar Vihar, Main Road, Bilaspur, C.G. (Insure Of Vehicle Cg-12-Ay-
4514)
... Respondents
For Appellants/Claimants : Ms. Swati Rani Saraf, Advocate.
For respondents No. 1 & 2 : None.
For Respondent No. 3 : Ms. Mansi Bandey, Advocate.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal
Judgment on Board
(04.11.2026)
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
31.01.2024, passed in Claim Case No. 140/2021, whereby the
learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of
Rs.11,68,470/- as compensation for the death of Lakhandhar
Yadav (54-years-old) who died in a road accident which took
place on 24.06.2020.
2. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the income
assessed by the Claims Tribunal at Rs. 7,555/- per month is on
the lower side, as on the date of the accident i.e. 24.06.2020,
the minimum wages of the unskilled labourer were Rs. 8,860/-.
Hence, the appeal be allowed, and the award passed by the
Claims Tribunal be suitably enhanced.
3. Learned counsel for respondent No. 3 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

3
rival submissions made herein-above and went through the
records with utmost circumspection.
5. In the case in hand, the learned Tribunal has indeed taken the
deceased's monthly income to be Rs. 7,555/-. The claimants
pleaded that the deceased was a mason aged about 54 years
and was earning Rs. 12,000/- per month, but they could not
produce any cogent or reliable proof to substantiate their claim.
Therefore, it would be proper to take his monthly income as Rs.
8,860/-, in accordance with the Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages
Notification issued by the office of the Labour Commissioner,
Chhattisgarh, for unskilled labour for that period. Accordingly,
the impugned award needs to be modified to that extent.
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
2
Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Ors and
Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru
3
Ram & Ors , this Court is computing the compensation as
below:-
Sr.
No.
Heads Compensation awarded by this
Court
1 Income Rs. 8860x12 = 1,06,320/-
2. Future prospect (+)10% (i.e. 10,632) = 1,16,952
3. Deduction (-) 1/4 (i.e. 29,238) = 87,714/-
4. Multiplier (x) 11 = 9,64,854/-
5. Other conventional
heads
Rs. 2,09,000/-
[16,500+16,500+(44,000x4)]
Total Rs. 11,73,854/-
7. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of
Rs.11,68,470/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to
Rs.11,73,854/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of
Rs.11,68,470/-, the appellants are held entitled for an
additional amount of Rs.5,384/- . The additional amount of
1 (2017) 16 SCC 680
2 (2009) 6 SCC 121
3 (2018) 18 SCC 130

4
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.
8. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed and the 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
H.L. Sahu