Parwin Bano Vs Radhelal Sahu

2 - Ku. Nishad D/o Late Nasim Ali, Aged About 7 Years Minor Through Natural Guardian Appellant No.1 Parwin Bano Wd/o Late Nasim Ali, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Subhash Nagar, Maudhapara, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Ku. Tarana Bano D/o Late Nasim Ali, Aged About 5 Years Minor Through Natural Guardian Appellant No.1 Parwin Bano Wd/o Late Nasim Ali, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Subhash Nagar, Maudhapara, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Ku. Alam Bano D/o Late Nasim Ali, Aged About 3 Years Minor Through Natural Guardian Appellant No.1 Parwin Bano Wd/o Late Nasim Ali, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Subhash Nagar, Maudhapara, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 5 - Ku. Nasima Bano D/o Late Nasim Ali, Aged About 6 Months, Minor Through Natural Guardian Appellant No.1 Parwin Bano Wd/o Late Nasim Ali, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Subhash Nagar, Maudhapara, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh ................Claimants, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Appellants

¶10

versus

¶11

1 - Radhelal Sahu S/o Bahal Ram Sahu, Permanent Address Village Sigharghat, P.S. And Tah. Khairagarh, Distt. Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh, Presently R/o In The House Of Horilal Sahu, Near Buddh

¶12

2

¶13

Mata Mandir, Yashodhara Nagar, P.S. Yashodhara Nagar, Nagpur, Distt. Nagpur M.H. .................Driver Of Vehicle Truck No. M H-31/ C B/ 6255, Maharashtra

¶14

2 - Nazma Bagum W/o Mohd. Asle, R/o First Address Plot No.277, Mahal Killa Nagpur M.H., Second Address Kendriy Vidhalaya Road, Near The House Of Deshmukh, Ward No.18, Mahal, Nagpur, Distt. Nagpur M.H. .................Owner Of Vehicle Truck No. M H-31/ C B/ 6255, District : Nagpur, Maharashtra

¶15

3 - Shri Ram General Insurance Co. Ltd. Through In Charge Officer, Shri Ram General Insurance Co. Ltd. Plot No.1, Fourth Floor, Near Maruti Show Room, G E Road, Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh .................Insurer Of Vehicle Truck No. M H-31/ C B/ 6255, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶16

... Respondents

¶17

(Cause-title taken from the Case Information System)

¶18

--------------------------------------------- For Appellant :-	-------------------------------------------------- Mr. Amiyakant Tiwari, Advocate
For Respondent No. 3 :-	Mr. Saurabh Gupta, Advocate
	appears on behalf of Mr. Sourabh
	Sharma, Advocate.
For Respondent No. 1 & 2:-	None.

¶19

SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

¶20

Order On Board

¶21

04.07.2025

¶22

This appeal has been filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, against the award dated 25.10.2016 passed by the learned Chief Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur (C.G.), in Claim Case No. 133/2012 (“Parwain Bano & Ors Vs. Radhelal Sahu & Ors.”) whereby an amount of Rs. 11,37,750/- with interest

¶23

3

¶24

@ 6% per annum has been awarded in the favour of the claimants of the deceased for their irreparable loss.

¶25

Brief facts of the case, is that, Nasim Ali, aged 28 years, was employed as a skilled driver, earning approximately Rs. 7,000/per month. On 28.07.2012, at around 3:00 a.m., while he was standing beside a Bolero jeep (CG-04/H/4233) parked near Manegaon Pal Dhaba on National Highway No.6, he was struck by a truck (MH-31/CB/6255) being driven rashly and negligently by respondent No.1 . Therefore, the appellants/claimants of the deceased preferred an application claiming a total compensation of Rs. 26,92,000/-.

¶26

After considering the evidence and documents brought on record, the tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs. 4,500/per month i.e. Rs. 54,000/- per annum. After adding 50 per cent towards future prospect i.e. Rs. 27,000/-, the annual dependency was taken as Rs. 81,000/-. After deduction of 1/4 of the income i.e. Rs. 20,250/- for personal expenses, the amount would be Rs. 60,750/- and considering the age of the deceased to be 28 to 30 years and the appellants/claimants are the wife and four daughters of the deceased, the Tribunal applied the multiplier of 17 and calculated the total loss of dependency as Rs. 10,32,750/-. Further Rs. 25,000/- towards funeral expenses, Rs. 50,000/towards love and affection and Rs. 30,000/- towards loss of consortium has been awarded. Accordingly, the Claims Tribunal

¶27

4

¶28

has awarded total compensation of Rs. 11,37,750/- in favour of the wife and four daughters of the deceased with interest @ 6% per annum, from the date of application till its realization. Hence, this appeal for enhancement.

¶29

Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants submits that the claims Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 11,37,750/- which is not in accordance with law and the same is required to be enhanced in accordance with law. He further submits that the compensation awarded under other heads is also on lower side and needs to be enhanced. Hence, this appeal may be allowed by enhancing the compensation amount suitably.

¶30

On the other hand, it has argued on behalf of the counsel for respondent No. 3 that in the facts and circumstances of case, the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is just and proper and requires no further enhancement.

¶31

None for respondent Nos. 1 & 2.

¶32

Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶33

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 a meager amount of compensation, nor a Bonanza.

¶34

Now this Court shall examine as to whether the compensation of awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the

¶35

5

¶36

given facts and circumstances of the case.

¶37

As regards the income of the deceased, though the claimants have pleaded that the deceased was earning Rs. 7,000/- per month from his work, but no evidence in this regard has been produced by the claimants. Therefore, the Tribunal keeping in mind the nature of occupation, date of accident, wage structure prevailing on the date of accident and also the evidence available on record, assessed the income of the deceased at Rs. 4,500/per month which appears to be proper on the date of accident Hence, accepting the income of the deceased Rs. 4,500/- per month, the annual income comes to Rs. 54,000/- per annum. As per National Insurance Company Ltd., Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others, (2017) 16 SCC 680 after adding 50% towards future prospects i.e. Rs. 27,000/-, the annual income comes to Rs. 81,000/-.

¶38

Considering the fact that the deceased was aged about 28 to 30 years and the appellant/claimants are the wife and four daughters of the deceased so deduction towards personal expenses would be 1/4 (Rs. 20,250/-) of the income and after deduction of the same the annual dependency comes to Rs. 60,750/-. 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 and also

¶39

6

¶40

considering the age of the deceased, after applying multiplier of 17, the total loss of dependency works out to Rs. 10,32,750/-. The claimants are further entitled for Rs. 18,000/- towards loss of estate (increase of 10% in every three years) and Rs. 18,000/- for funeral expenses (increase of 10% in every three years). As per ' Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nanu, reported in AIR Online 2018 SC 189 , the claimants are further entitled for Rs. (40,000X5+10%+10%) each (increase of 10% in every three years) i.e. Rs. 2,40,000 for consortium. Accordingly, the appellants/claimants i.e. mother and sister of the deceased would become entitled for total compensation of Rs. 13,08,750/- in the following manner:-

¶41

S.No.	Heads	Calculation
01	Towards loss of dependency	Rs. 10,32,750/-
02	Towards consortium (40,000X5+10%+10%) each (increase of 10% in every three years)	Rs. 2,40,000/-
03	Towards loss of estate along with increase of 10% in every threeyears.	Rs. 18,000/-
04	Towards Funeral Expenses along with increase of 10% in everythreeyears.	Rs. 18,000/-
	Total	Rs. 13,08,750/-

¶42

Thus, the total compensation is recomputed as Rs. 13,08,750/-. After deducting Rs. 11,37,750/- as awarded by the tribunal, the

¶43

7

¶44

enhancement would be Rs. 1,71,000/-.

¶45

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed . The claimants/appellants i.e. wife and four daughters of the deceased shall be entitled for the enhanced amount of Rs. 1,71,000/- 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.

¶46

Sd/-

¶47

(Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge

¶48

Vishakha

Parwin Bano v. Radhelal Sahu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parwin Bano v. Radhelal Sahu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pushpa Devi Kamle Vs Panchram Yadav

Smt. Sarita Sharma Vs Jaiky Sharma

Raghuvir Thakur (Minor) Vs Uday Singh Thakur

Sunni Muslim Jamaat Korba Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Shiv Bhagwan Rameshwar Lal Charitable Trust Vs Atul Bajaj

Shri Sourabh Sonchhatra Vs Atul Bajaj