Compensation based on correctly assessed minimum-wage income and conventional heads requires no enhancement.

Sunil Kumar Yadav died in a motor vehicle accident on 03.07.2011 involving offending vehicle No. C.G. 10 T 1721.

The appellant, Melan Bai Yadav, filed a claim petition against the driver, owner, and insurer of the vehicle.

The Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur, in Claim Case No. 178/2021, awarded total compensation of Rs. 7,54,094 by award dated 14.02.2024.

The claimant preferred an appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking enhancement on the grounds that the deceased’s income and compensation under conventional heads had been assessed inadequately.

The High Court condoned the delay of 290 days in filing the appeal under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

The High Court admitted the appeal, and heard it finally with the consent of the parties.

Whether the Tribunal assessed the deceased’s monthly income and loss of dependency on an inadequate or legally erroneous basis warranting enhancement of compensation?

Whether the compensation awarded under the conventional heads required enhancement?

Whether the total compensation of Rs. 7,54,094 awarded by the Tribunal was just, proper, and reasonable?

The Court applied Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, governing appeals against awards of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.

Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, under which delay may be condoned upon sufficient cause.

For quantifying compensation, the Court accepted the use of the applicable Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification for assessing the deceased’s income where the Tribunal had determined monthly income at Rs. 4,498.

It further relied on National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC 680, particularly its principles governing compensation under conventional heads, and held that the award of Rs. 74,000 under those heads was proper.

The governing standard was that compensation must be just, proper, and reasonable.

The High Court found no error in the Tribunal’s assessment of the deceased’s monthly income at Rs. 4,498, as that figure was based on the applicable Chhattisgarh minimum-wage notification.

Since the income assessment and consequential calculation of loss of dependency were neither illegal nor perverse, no interference was warranted.

The Court also held that the Tribunal’s award of Rs. 74,000 under the conventional heads conformed to the principles laid down in Pranay Sethi.

Accordingly, the claimant failed to establish that the compensation had been assessed on an inadequate or legally impermissible basis.

It held that the compensation of Rs. 7,54,094 awarded by the Tribunal was just, proper, and reasonable.

The appeal seeking enhancement was therefore dismissed, and the Tribunal’s award dated 14.02.2024 was affirmed.

No order was made as to costs.