No Proof Of Claimed ₹30,000 Monthly Income: Chhattisgarh HC Raises Widow And Sons’ Accident Compensation To ₹9.23 Lakh Using ₹9,200 Minimum Wage

In brief

The question

Whether the Tribunal’s assessment of the deceased’s income at ₹6,000 per month should be revised in determining compensation.

The court held

The Court partly allowed the appeal and enhanced total compensation from ₹5,75,200 to ₹9,23,640, making an additional ₹3,48,440 payable with interest at 6% per annum from the date the claim application was filed until realization.

It also directed

The remaining terms of the Tribunal’s award were left intact.

The Registry was directed to communicate the enhanced amount to the claimants in written Hindi, with paralegal assistance if required.

01Facts

The claimants, the widow and two sons of Bhagwani Prasad Rai, appealed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking enhancement of compensation for his death in a road accident on 28 July 2021.

¶ 1

The Claims Tribunal awarded ₹5,75,200, assessing the deceased’s monthly income at ₹6,000 and awarding consortium and other conventional sums.

¶ 1

The claimants asserted that the deceased was an RMP doctor earning ₹30,000 per month, but produced no credible evidence to establish that occupation or income.

¶ 2, 5

02Issues

i.Whether the Tribunal’s assessment of the deceased’s income at ₹6,000 per month should be revised in determining compensation.

¶ 2, 5

ii.Whether the sums awarded for loss of consortium, loss of estate, and funeral expenses required enhancement.

¶ 2, 6

03Law Applied

Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 provides for an appeal against a Claims Tribunal’s award.

¶ 1

In assessing compensation, Sarla Verma & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Ors., (2009) 6 SCC 121, supplies principles concerning deductions for personal expenses and the multiplier.

¶ 7

National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC 680, guides the addition for future prospects and conventional heads.

¶ 7

Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors., (2018) 18 SCC 1305, recognises consortium compensation for eligible family members.

¶ 7

The Court also considered the Chhattisgarh minimum-wages notification applicable on the accident date when assessing income.

¶ 5

Provisions in the judgment · 1 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 173

04Reasoning

As the claimants did not substantiate the asserted medical occupation or earnings, the Court rejected the claimed ₹30,000 monthly income but considered ₹6,000 too low. Having regard to the accident date and the applicable Chhattisgarh minimum-wages notification, it assessed monthly income at ₹9,200.

¶ 5

It retained the Tribunal’s 10% future-prospects addition, one-third deduction for personal expenses, multiplier of nine, and ₹30,000 motorcycle-repair amount, while increasing consortium to ₹44,000 for each of the three claimants and enhancing loss of estate and funeral expenses to ₹16,500 each.

¶ 6–7