Partly allowed

Josfina Lakda v. Shobharam Sahu

Chhattisgarh HC14 Sept 2026MAC/441/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the appeal in part, computing the deceased's income based on minimum wages due to lack of proof for higher earnings. The tribunal's award of Rs. 12,33,000 was enhanced to Rs. 14,74,800 with an additional Rs. 2,41,800.

What did the court decide?

The compensation award of Rs. 12,33,000 is enhanced to Rs. 14,74,800. Appellants are entitled to an additional Rs. 2,41,800 with interest at 6% per annum from the date of filing the claim petition bef

Josfina Lakda Vs Shobharam Sahu — Motor Accident Claims | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

CGHC010058302024

¶3

Digitally BHOLA signed byBHOLANATH NATH KHATAI KHATAI Date:2026.09.16 10:38:10 +0530

¶4

2026:CGHC:40203

¶5

NAFR

¶6

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶7

MAC No. 441 of 2024

¶8

1 - Josfina Lakda Wd/o Late Sagar Lakda Aged About 44 Years R/o Village- Dipka, Jyoti Nagar, Shahid Bhagat Singh, Ward No. 02, Police Station And Teahsil -Dipka, Dist. Korba, C.G.

¶9

2 - Dipak Lakda S/o Late Sagar Lakda Aged About 24 Years R/o Village- Dipka, Jyoti Nagar, Shahid Bhagat Singh, Ward No. 02, Police Station And Teahsil -Dipka, Dist. Korba, C.G.

¶10

3 - Dilip Lakda S/o Late Sagar Lakda Aged About 17 Years (At Present Major), R/o Village- Dipka, Jyoti Nagar, Shahid Bhagat Singh, Ward No. 02, Police Station And Teahsil -Dipka, Dist. Korba, C.G.

¶11

... Appellant(s)

¶12

versus

¶13

1 - Shobharam Sahu S/o Devideen Sahu Aged About 34 Years R/o- C/o- Krishna Bai Sahu, Ward No. 14, Magazine Bhatta, Pump House, Korba Chowki, C.S.B., Police Station- City Kotwali, Dist.- Korba, (Driver Of The Vehicle Trailer No. -C.G.-12BG4792)

¶14

2 - M/s Bajarang Realcon And Transport Company R/o- Plot No. - 349, Indira Commercial And Residential Complex, Transport Nagar Korba, Dist.- Korba, C.G. (Owner Of The Vehicle Trailer No. -C.G.-12 BG-4792)

¶15

3 - Branch Manager United India Insurance Company Limited Branch Office Magarpara Road, Bhartiya Jivan Bima, 1st Floor,

¶16

¶17

Place Station - Civil Line Tahsil And District - Bilaspur (C.G.) (Insurer Of The Vehicle Trailer No. - C.G. -12 B G- 4792)

¶18

... Respondent(s)

¶19

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Anand Kesharwani, Advocate For Respondent No.3 : Mr. Dashrath Gupta, Advocate

¶20

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board

¶21

(15.09.2026)

¶22

1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short the "Act of 1988") has been preferred by the appellants/claimants seeking enhancement of the amount of compensation, challenging the impugned award dated 29.11.2023, passed by the 6^th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur (CG), in Claim Case No.1607/2022, whereby the Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.12,33,000/- as compensation for the death of Sagar Lakda, who died in a road accident that took place on 23.09.2022.

¶23

2. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants/claimants submits that the Tribunal has committed a manifest error in assessing the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.8,100/-, which, according to him, is even lower than the minimum wages payable to an unskilled labourer at the relevant time. Hence, he prays that the instant appeal may kindly be allowed and the compensation awarded by the Tribunal be suitably enhanced in accordance with law.

¶24

3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3 Insurance Company opposes the submission made by the counsel for appellants and submits that in the facts and circumstances of case, the

¶25

¶26

award passed by the Tribunal is just & proper and does not require any enhancement.

¶27

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection.

¶28

5. Though it has been claimed by the claimants that the deceased was earning Rs.15,000/- per month by working in a tire garage, no documentary evidence in this regard has been brought on record. The accident occurred on 23.09.2022 and the minimum wages of even an unskilled labourer at that time was Rs.9,960/-. Accordingly, the monthly income of the deceased is reassessed at Rs .9,960/- , resulting in an annual income of Rs.1,19,520/-.

¶29

6. On the date of accident, the deceased was aged about 48 years and a non-salaried person. There are total three claimants who are the wife & two sons of the deceased.

¶30

7. Considering the date of the accident, the age of the deceased and the number of dependants, this Court finds that the addition towards future prospects, the deduction towards personal expenses, the multiplier applied and the amount granted under conventional heads by the Tribunal are just, proper and in accordance with law.

¶31

8. Thus, in light of the aforesaid discussion and the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Company Ltd. V. Pranay Sethi¹ , Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Ors² and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @

¶32

1 (2017) 16 SCC 680

¶33

2 (2009) 6 SCC 121

¶34

¶35

Chuhru Ram & Ors³ , the compensation is recomputed as under:-

¶36

Sl.	Heads	Compensation	Compensation
No.		awarded by the Tribunal	awarded by this Court
1	Income	8,100x12 =97,200	9960 x12 =1,19,520
2.	Future prospects	(+)25% (i.e.24,300) = 1,21,500	(+)25% (i.e.29,880) = 1,49,400
3.	Deduction	(-) 1/3rd (i.e. 40,500)= 81,000	(-)1/3 (i.e. 49,800) = 99,600
4.	Multiplier	(x)13 =10,53,000	(x)13 = 12,94,800
5.	Funeral Expenses	18,000	18,000
6.	Loss of Estate	18,000	18,000
7.	Loss of	1,44,000	1,44,000
	consortium	(48,000 x 3)	(48,000 x 3)
	Total	Rs. 12,33,000/-	Rs. 14,74,800/-

¶37

9. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the compensation of Rs.12,33,000/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is hereby enhanced to Rs.14,74,800/-. Consequently, after adjusting the amount of Rs.12,33,000/- already awarded, the appellants/claimants shall be entitled to an additional amount of Rs.2,41,800/- . The aforesaid additional/enhanced amount of compensation shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition before the Tribunal till its realization. The remaining terms and conditions of the impugned award shall remain unaltered.

¶38

10. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed and the impugned award stands modified to the extent as indicated herein-above.

¶39

3 (2018) 18 SCC 130

¶40

¶41

11. The Registry is directed to communicate the claimants in writing “the enhanced/additional amount” in this appeal as against the award made by the concerned Tribunal. The said communication be made in Hindi Deonagri language and the help of paralegal workers may be availed with a coordination of Secretary, Legal Aid of the concerned area wherein the claimants reside.

¶42

Sd/(Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge

¶43

Khatai

Josfina Lakda v. Shobharam Sahu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Josfina Lakda v. Shobharam Sahu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases