Chhattisgarh High CourtTransport, Maritime, and Aviation LawCivil Law

Road-Accident Victim’s Family Gets Rs 5,384 More As Chhattisgarh HC Assesses Deceased’s Income At State Minimum Wage

SMT. KRISHNA BAI YADAVv.BALKRISHNA YADAV

Road-Accident Victim’s Family Gets Rs 5,384 More As Chhattisgarh HC Assesses Deceased’s Income At State Minimum Wage. SMT. KRISHNA BAI YADAV vs BALKRISHNA YADAV. Chhattisgarh High Court. LawLens
The LawLens card for this judgmentXLinkedInWhatsApp

In brief

The question

1. Whether the Tribunal’s assessment of the deceased’s monthly income at ₹7,555 should be replaced by the applicable minimum wage of ₹8,860 for calculating compensation.

The court held

The appeal was partly allowed, and the award was enhanced from ₹11,68,470 to ₹11,73,854.

It also directed

The claimants were awarded an additional ₹5,384, carrying interest at 6% per annum from the date of filing the claim application until realization; the remaining terms of the Tribunal’s award were left unchanged.

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

01Facts

The claimants appealed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking enhancement of compensation awarded for the death of Lakhandhar Yadav, aged 54, in a road accident on 24 June 2020. The Claims Tribunal had awarded ₹11,68,470, assessing the deceased’s monthly income at ₹7,555. The claimants contended that the income should instead be assessed at the applicable minimum wage of ₹8,860 per month; the insurer opposed enhancement.

¶ 1–3

The deceased’s claimed occupation as a mason and monthly income of ₹12,000 were not supported by cogent or reliable evidence.

¶ 5

02Issues

i.1. Whether the Tribunal’s assessment of the deceased’s monthly income at ₹7,555 should be replaced by the applicable minimum wage of ₹8,860 for calculating compensation.

¶ 2, 5

ii.2. Whether applying the relevant compensation principles to the revised income entitled the claimants to enhanced compensation.

¶ 6–7

03Law Applied

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

¶ 1

In assessing compensation, the Court relied on National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC 680; Sarla Verma & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Ors., (2009) 6 SCC 121; and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors., (2018) 18 SCC 130, applying principles concerning future prospects, deduction for personal expenses, the multiplier, and conventional heads of compensation.

¶ 6

Where the claimed income is not proved by reliable evidence, the Court may assess income by reference to the applicable minimum-wage notification.

¶ 5

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

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 173

04Reasoning

The Court found no reliable proof of the deceased’s asserted income of ₹12,000 per month, but held that the Tribunal’s assessment of ₹7,555 was below the applicable minimum wage for unskilled labour.

¶ 5

It therefore used ₹8,860 monthly income, added 10% for future prospects, deducted one-fourth for personal expenses, and applied a multiplier of 11. Adding ₹2,09,000 under conventional heads produced total compensation of ₹11,73,854.

¶ 5–6

05Holding

The appeal was partly allowed, and the award was enhanced from ₹11,68,470 to ₹11,73,854.

¶ 7–8

The claimants were awarded an additional ₹5,384, carrying interest at 6% per annum from the date of filing the claim application until realization; the remaining terms of the Tribunal’s award were left unchanged.

¶ 7–8

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

¶ 9
Chhattisgarh High Court

Original Court PDF

SMT. KRISHNA BAI YADAVvsBALKRISHNA YADAV

Chhattisgarh High Court · November 04, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment