Dismissed¶29

Sonia Manikpuri v. Mohd. Shahid

Motor Accidents – Enhancement appeal

Chhattisgarh HC4 Feb 2026MAC/1581/2023

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

MAC No. 1581 of 2023, Chhattisgarh High Court (Bilaspur), decided 05-02-2026 by Rakesh Mohan Pandey, J. Enhancement appeal by widow and parents (Sonia Manikpuri et al.) against award of Rs.18,03,360/- with 9% interest by Eighth MACT Bilaspur (Claim Case No.449 of 2020) for death of Kamal Manikpuri in 23.6.2020 accident involving truck CG 17 C 7590 (owner Mohd. Shahid; driver Ramesh Kumar Khare; insurer SBI General). Computation upheld: minimum wages matrix income Rs.9,770/- p.m., multiplier 15, 1/3rd deduction, 40% future prospects, consortium/funeral/estate heads. Section 166 Motor Vehicles Act. No precedent cited. Appeal dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The Tribunal rightly assessed the income of the deceased by applying the minimum wages matrix. ¶28

Sonia Manikpuri Vs Mohd. Shahid — Motor Accident Claims | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

NIRMALA RAO

2026:CGHC:6478

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

MAC No. 1581 of 2023

¶7

1 - Sonia Manikpuri W/o Late Kamal Manikpuri Aged About 28 Years Through Father Shri Nanak Das Manikpuri, R/o Hirri, Post And Police Station Hirri, Tahsil Bilha, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶8

2 - Lakhan Das Manikpuri S/o Late Shri Charan Das Manikpuri Aged About 56 Years R/o Hirri, Post And Police Station Hirri, Tahsil Bilha, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶9

3 - Smt. Krishna Bai W/o Shri Lakhan Lal Manikpuri Aged About 50 Years R/o Hirri, Post And Police Station Hirri, Tahsil Bilha, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶10

... Petitioner(s)

¶11

versus

¶12

1 - Mohd. Shahid S/o Akbar Bhai Plastic Wale Aged About 43 Years R/o Qt. No.852/26, Nurani Masjid, Ravi Nagar, Near Raja Talab, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) (Owner Of The Offending Vehicle Truck Hywa No. C.G.-17/c-7590)

¶13

2 - Ramesh Kumar Khare S/o Radheshyam Khare Aged About 39 Years R/o Village Kusmunda, Post And Tahsil Champa, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) (Driver Of The Offending Vehicle Truck Hywa No. C.G.-17/c-7590)

¶14

3 - Branch Manager S.B.I. General Insurance Company, 2nd Flour, New Market, T.P. Nagar, Bhopal, District Bhopal (M.P.) (Insurer Of The Offending Vehicle Truck Hywa No. C.G.-17/c-7590)

¶15

... Respondent(s)

¶16

¶17

For Appellants	: Ms. Deblina Maity, Advocate holding the brief of Shri Akhtar Hussain, Advocate.
For Respondent No.3	: Mr. Utsav Mahiswar, Advocate.

¶18

Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey

¶19

Judgment On Board

¶20

05-02-2026

¶21

1) The appellants/ claimants have preferred this appeal challenging the judgment and award passed by the learned Eighth Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur in Claim Case No.449 of 2020 dated 1.8.2023 whereby the learned Tribunal has granted compensation to the tune of Rs.18,03,360/- alongwith interest @ 9% per annum on account of death of Kamal Manikpuri.

¶22

2) The facts, in brief, are that on 23.6.2020, the driver of the offending Hywa Truck bearing registration No.CG 17 C 7590 by driving it rashly and negligently dashed the deceased Kamal Manikpuri, resultantly, he sustained injuries and succumbed to death. The claimants, who are widow and parents of the deceased, filed a claim case under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act wherein they pleaded that at the time of the accident, the age of the deceased was 32 years and earning Rs.12,000/- per month. The learned Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.9,770/- per month by applying the minimum wages matrix. Further, the learned Tribunal applied the multiplier of 15, deducted 1/3rd for personal and living expenses of the deceased, granted 40% for future prospects,

¶23

¶24

Rs.15,000/- for loss of estate, Rs.15,000/- for funeral expenses and Rs.44,000/- for loss of consortium to each of the claimants.

¶25

3) Learned counsel appearing for the claimants/ appellants would argue that the learned Tribunal failed to grant proper compensation. She would pray for enhancement.

¶26

4) Learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company would oppose the submissions made by counsel for the appellants. He would submit that the learned Tribunal has granted just and proper compensation and the appeal deserves to be dismissed.

¶27

5) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection.

¶28

6) It appears that the learned Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the deceased by applying the minimum wages matrix. Further granted 40% towards future prospects, applied a multiplier of 15 looking to the age of the deceased and deducted 1/3rd towards personal and living expenses, taking into consideration the number of dependents.

¶29

7) Learned Tribunal further granted proper compensation for loss of consortium, funeral expenses and loss of estate. I do not find any good ground to interfere in the matter. Accordingly, this appeal fails and is hereby dismissed .

¶30

SD/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE

¶31

Nimmi

Sonia Manikpuri v. Mohd. Shahid

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sonia Manikpuri v. Mohd. Shahid

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mangilal, Vs Kapil and Others

Iffco- Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd., Vs Smt. Yaad Bai

Ramdhari (Now Dead) through LRs Vs Dayavati Devi (Now Dead) through Lrs

Chhattisgarh State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited Vs Union of India

Amar Singh Gaikwad Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Reliance General Insurance Company Limited, Vs Smt. Geeta Bai Kashyap