Smt. Meera Bai Nag Vs Shridharan Nair

¶1

1

¶2

Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2025.04.04 15:25:09 +0530

¶3

2025:CGHC:15437

¶4

NAFR

¶5

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

MAC No. 1071 of 2017

¶7

1 - Smt. Meera Bai Nag, Wd/o Lt. Bodhu @ Ram Kumar Nag, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Village Near House Of Rajkumar Jha, Maa Kali Chowk Routpara Jagdalpur District Bastar Chhattisgarh

¶8

2 - Laxman Kahar, S/o Chhabilal Kahar, Aged About 64 Years R/o Village Near House Of Rajkumar Jha, Maa Kali Chowk Routpara Jagdalpur District Bastar Chhattisgarh

¶9

... Appellants

¶10

versus

¶11

1 - Shridharan Nair, S/o Krishnan Nair, Aged About 53 Years, Profession Driver In C. R. P. F. Battalion 199, R/o Village Atoli District Kalikar P. S. Atoli Keral, Present R/o C. R. P. F. Battalion 199 Bhairamgarh District Bijapur Chhattisgarh

¶12

2 - D. I. G. Chhattisgarh, C. R. P. F. Bharani Post Ganiyari District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

¶13

3 - R. S. Chauhan S/o Tejbhan Singh Chauhan, Aged About 44 Years A. S. I., C. R. P. F. Battalion 199, Naya Bus Stand, Jagdalpur District Bastar Chhattisgarh

¶14

4 - D. I. G., C. R. P. F., C. R. P. F. Camp, Ghedapaida Lalbagh Road Jagdalpur, District Bastar Chhattisgarh

¶15

---- Respondents

¶16

2

¶17

For Appellants/Claimants : Mr. Praveen Kumar Tulsyan, Advocate. For Respondent No.1 : None For Respondent No.2, 3 & 4: Mr. Ramakant Mishra, DSGI

¶18

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal

¶19

Order on Board

¶20

(02.04.2025)

¶21

This appeal arises out of the award dated 17.05.2017 passed by 3^rd Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bastar Place Jagdalpur (C.G.), in Claim Case No. 67/2016 awarding a compensation of Rs.3,44,000/- with interest @ 9% per annum, in favour of the appellant/claimant No.1 (mother of the deceased) for her irreparable loss.

¶22

The averment in the claim petition, in brief, is that on 10.09.2015 Ajay Kumar Nag (now deceased) was going along with his friend Rohit to weekly market and when they reached, village Takraguda, NH-30, near ITI, driver/respondent No. 1 of offending vehicle bearing registration No. CG-10-L-1226 drove the vehicle in rash and negligent manner and dashed the motorcycle, due to which the deceased (Ajay Kumar Nag) died on the spot. A report was lodged, based on which offence was registered. It is stated that on the date of the accident, the age of the deceased was 22 years, he was doing the business of fancy items and was earning Rs. 6,000/- per month from his work. Due to the casual death of the deceased, there is an irreparable loss to the appellants/claimants. Therefore, the appellants (Mother & Grand Father of the deceased) preferred an application

¶23

3

¶24

claiming compensation to the tune of Rs. 13,35,000/-.

¶25

When the claim application for compensation was filed by parents of deceased Ajay Kumar Nag before the Claims Tribunal against the driver, owner and insurance company of the alleged vehicle, the Tribunal has taken income of the deceased as Rs 3,000/per month i.e. Rs. 36,000/- per annum in absence of any documentary proof of income. The deceased was aged about 22 years and the claimants are the parents of the deceased so after deduction ½ towards personal expenses i.e. Rs. 18,000/- the annual income of the deceased was taken as Rs.18,000/- and considering the age of the deceased, after applying multiplier of 18, the total loss of dependency calculated to Rs. 3,24,000/- and on other heads Rs. 20,000/- has been calculated and awarded total compensation of Rs. 3,44,000/(3,24,000+20,000=3,44,000) with interest @ 9% per annum, has been awarded in favour of the appellant/claimant No.1. Hence, this appeal for enhancement. Furthermore, appellant/claimant no.2 was the maternal grandfather of deceased Ajay Kumar Nag, therefore, he was not treated as a dependent and no award was passed in his favour.

¶26

Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side and needs to be enhanced suitably. He further submits that the claimants have pleaded the income of the deceased as Rs. 6,000/- per month, but the learned Claims Tribunal has only assessed the income of the deceased as Rs. 3,000/- per month and awarded total compensation of Rs. 3,44,000/- including the amount of other conventional heads of Rs. 20,000/-. The learned counsel urged that the Tribunal erred in not considering future prospects while computing compensation as it

¶27

4

¶28

failed to appreciate that the deceased could have earned much more in the near future if he had not met with the accident as he was only aged about 22 years and could have lived for another 35-40 years. The learned counsel further submits that the Tribunal has awarded lesser compensation on other heads, therefore, this appeal may be allowed and amount of compensation needs to be enhanced suitably.

¶29

None appeared on behalf of respondents No. 1.

¶30

On the other hand, it is submitted on behalf of the counsel for respondents No.2 to 4 that in view of facts and circumstances of case, the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is just and proper and requires no further enhancement.

¶31

Heard counsel for the parties and perused the documents on record.

¶32

In a motor accident claim case, what is important is that, the compensation to be awarded by the Courts/Tribunals should be just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the case. It should neither be meager amount of compensation, nor a Bonanza.

¶33

Now this Court shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.3,44,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the given facts and circumstances of the case.

¶34

As regards the income of the deceased, though the claimants have pleaded that the deceased was earning Rs.6,000/-. per month from his business, but no documentary evidence in support thereof has been produced, but it cannot be said that the deceased was not earning anything from his work. Therefore, in absence of any reliable evidence regarding income of the deceased, keeping in mind the nature of occupation, date of accident, wage structure prevailing on

¶35

5

¶36

the date of accident, price index and cost of living etc. specially notification by Labour Department for minimum wages. Upon considering the aforementioned factors, I find it appropriate to take income of deceased as Rs. 5,787/- per month as minimum wages, at the relevant time of accident i.e. 10.09.2015. The annual income comes to Rs. 69,444/- per annum. As per National Insurance Company Ltd., Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others, (2017) 16 SCC 680 after adding 40% towards future prospects i.e. Rs. 27,777/-, the annual income comes to Rs. 97,221/-.

¶37

The deceased was aged about 22 years and was unmarried and the claimants are the parents of the deceased so deduction towards personal expenses would be 50% which comes to Rs. 48,610/-. In view of judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma (Smt.) and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121 and National Insurance Company Ltd., Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others, (2017) 16 SCC 680 considering the age of the deceased, after applying multiplier of 18, the total loss of dependency works out to Rs. 8,74,994/-. The claimant no. 1 is further entitled to Rs. 15,000/- for loss of estate, Rs. 15,000/- for funeral expenses and as per ' Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nanu, reported in AIR Online 2018 SC 189 , the claimant No.1 is further entitled to Rs. 40,000/- for loss of love and affection. Therefore, the claimant No.1 would become entitled for total compensation of Rs. 9,44,994/-. Thus, the claimant No.1 is entitled for compensation in the following manner:-

¶38

S.No.	Heads	Calculation
01	Towards loss of dependency	Rs. 8,74,994/-

¶39

6

¶40

02	Towards loss of estate	Rs. 15,000/-
03	Towards love and affection to	Rs. 40,000/-
	claimant No.1@Rs. 40,000/-
04	Funeral Expenses	Rs. 15,000/-
	Total	Rs. 9,44,994/-

¶41

Thus, the total compensation is recomputed as Rs. 9,44,994/-. After deducting Rs. 3,44,000/- as awarded by the tribunal, the enhancement would be Rs. 6,00,994/-.

¶42

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. The claimant No.1 shall be entitled to get Rs. 6,00,994/- in addition to what is already awarded by the Claims Tribunal. The enhanced amount will carry interest @ 6% from the date of enhancement of the award till its realization. The impugned award stands modified to the above extent and rest of the conditions shall remain intact.

¶43

The Registry is further directed to communicate the claimants in writing “the enhanced amount” in this appeal as against the amount awarded by the 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.

¶44

Sd/-

¶45

(Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge

¶46

Shubham

Smt. Meera Bai Nag v. Shridharan Nair

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Meera Bai Nag v. Shridharan Nair

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhoku @ Puran Chand Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Nuklesh Satnami @ Tetku Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Yashwant @ Ashwan Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ramnarayan Kevat Vs Jayanti Bai

Radha Krishna Motwani Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Hira Sahu Vs Gaurav Bhardwaj