Smt. Manjula Vs Kishore Rajwde

Page 1 of 4

(MAC No.1084/2020)

2026:CGHC:16173

Digitally signed by SISTA NAFR SISTA SOMAYAJULU SOMAYAJULU Date: 2026.04.09 11:01:15 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR +0530

¶5

MAC No. 1084 of 2020

¶6

{Arising out of award dated 17-3-2020 passed by the 4^th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur in Claim Case No.758/2016}

¶7

Smt. Manjula, W/o Vijay Aawal, aged about 56 years,

¶8

Ku. Megha, D/o Vijay Aawal, aged about 28 years,

¶9

Ku. Manshi, D/o Vijay Aawal, aged about 25 years, All the appellants are R/o B-13/7, Sector-3, Udya Society, P.S. Aamanaka, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶10

(Applicants) ... Appellants

¶11

versus

¶12

Kishore Rajwde, S/o Late Gendlal Rajwade, R/o Quarter No.102/02, Railway Loco Colony, Khamtarai, P.S. Khamtarai, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶13

(Owner of Vehicle No.CG-04/HM-2447)

¶14

The New India Insurance Co. Ltd., Through Divisional Manager (Division No.2), The New India Insurance Co. Ltd., Behind Life Insurance Office, Pandari, Raipur, Tahsil and District Raipur, Chhattisgarh (Insurer of Vehicle No. CG-04/HM-2447)

¶15

(Non-applicants) ... Respondents

¶16

For Appellants : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Thakur, Advocate. For Respondent No.2 : Mr. Hanuman Prasad Agrawal, Advocate.

¶17

Judgment on Board

08/04/2026

Page 2 of 4

(MAC No.1084/2020)

This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has been preferred by the appellants herein/claimants seeking enhancement in the amount of compensation, challenging the impugned award dated 17-3-2020 passed by the 4^th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur in Claim Case No.758/2016, whereby the learned Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of ₹ 9,37,200/- as compensation for the death of Prateek Aawal, who was working as Executive (HR) in Narayana Hospital at Raipur, aged about 22 years at the time of incident. The appellants herein/claimants are mother and unmarried sisters, respectively, of deceased Prateek Aawal.

¶22

Mr. Rakesh Kumar Thakur, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants herein/claimants, would submit that the Claims Tribunal has deducted ½ amount on the head of dependency, whereas it should be 1/3, as the total dependents are three and secondly, no amount has been awarded under the head of Loss of Consortium, therefore, the amount of compensation be enhanced suitably.

¶23

Mr. Hanuman Prasad Agrawal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.2 herein/Insurance Company, would support the impugned award and oppose the appeal.

¶24

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered their rival submissions made herein-above and also gone through the record with utmost circumspection.

¶25

Page 3 of 4

¶26

(MAC No.1084/2020)

¶27

The learned Claims Tribunal has deducted ½ amount on the head of dependency and not awarded any amount under Loss of Consortium. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that 1/3 should be deducted under the head of dependency as the total dependents are three and ₹ 40,000/- each should be awarded to the dependents under the head of Loss of Consortium.

¶28

Thus, considering the evidence available on record and in light of the aforesaid discussion and in light of the judgments of the Supreme Court rendered in the matters of National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi 1, Sarla Verma & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Ors 2 and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors 3, this Court is computing the compensation as below:-

¶29

S. No.	Heads	Compensation awarded by the Tribunal	Compensation awarded by this Court/New Calculation
1.	Income	₹ 6,000/- per month. Yearly Income = ₹ 6,000 x 12 = ₹72,000/-.	₹ 6,000/- per month. Yearly Income = ₹ 6,000 x 12 = ₹72,000/-.
2.	Future Prospect	(+) 40% i.e. ₹ 28,800/-; ₹ 72,000 + 28,800 = ₹ 1,00,800/-	(+) 40% i.e. ₹ 28,800/-; ₹ 72,000 + 28,800 = ₹ 1,00,800/-
3.	Deduction	(-) ½ = ₹ 50,400/- ₹ 1,00,800 – 50,400 = ₹ 50,400/-	(-) 1/3 = ₹ 33,600/- ₹ 1,00,800 – 33,600 = ₹ 67,200/-
4.	Multiplier	(x)18 = ₹9,07,200/-	(x)18 = ₹ 12,09,600/-
5.	Loss of Estate	₹ 15,000/-	₹ 15,000/-
6.	Funeral Expenses	₹ 15,000/-	₹ 15,000/-
7.	Loss of Parental Consortium	NIL	₹ 40,000/- x 3 = ₹ 1,20,000/-
	Total	₹9,37,200/-	₹ 13,59,600/-

¶30

2 (2009) 6 SCC 121

¶31

3 (2018) 18 SCC 130

¶32

1 (2017) 16 SCC 680

¶33

Page 4 of 4

¶34

(MAC No.1084/2020)

¶35

In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of ₹ 9,37,200/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to ₹ 13,59,600/- . Hence, after deducting the amount of ₹ 9,37,200/- , the appellants are held entitled for an additional amount of ₹ 4,22,400/- . The concerned respondent is directed to deposit the amount of compensation as enhanced by this Court within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The additional amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of claim application before the Tribunal i.e. 8-3-2016 till its realisation. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact.

¶36

Accordingly, this appeal is allowed in part and the impugned award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above.

¶37

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge

¶38

Soma

Smt. Manjula v. Kishore Rajwde

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Manjula v. Kishore Rajwde

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

Rahul Agariya Vs Shiv Kumar Yadav

Cholamandlam Ms General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Mahendra Kumar Sahu

Dashru Ram Markam Vs Puranik Lal Deshmukh

Bharti Axa General Insurance Company Limited Vs Kamal Kumar Nayak

Ramanuj Vs Gyaniklal

Ashok Bhatia Vs Mangesh Kumar Salame