Chattisgarh High Court
Parwati Sonkar vs Rakesh Mishra on 4 August, 2025
Page No.1 of 6
IN
MAC-36-2022
2025:CGHC:38531
Digitally NAFR
SAIFAN signed by
KHAN SAIFAN
KHAN
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MAC No. 36 of 2022
[Arising out of award dated 29.09.2021, passed in Claim Case No.144
of 2019 (Parwati Sonkar and other v. Rakesh Mishra and others) by the
Chief Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur (CG)]
1 - Parwati Sonkar W/o Late Satyanarayan Sonkar Aged About 23
Years R/o Mahamayapara Ward No. 15 Simga District Balouda Bazzars
Chhattisgarh.
2 - Kunal Sonkar Late Satyanarayan Sonkar Aged About 8 Years Minor
Through Legal Guardian Mother Parwati Sonkar Appellant No. 1. R/o
Mahamayapara Ward No. 15 Simga District Balouda Bazzars
Chhattisgarh.
3 - Ganesh Sonkar S/o Late Ramsharan Sonkar Aged About 55 Years
R/o Mahamayapara Ward No. 15 Simga District Balouda Bazzars
Chhattisgarh.
4 - Tulsiram Sonkar S/o Ganesh Sonkar, Aged About 18 Years R/o
Mahamayapara Ward No. 15 Simga District Balouda Bazzars
Chhattisgarh.
... Appellants
Claimants
Versus
1 - Rakesh Mishra S/o Ramdhin Mishra Aged About 40 Years R/o
Village Tighara, Thana Sauhapur, District Satna (M.P.) Hall Mukam
Prem Nagar Mawa Thana Pandri District Raipur Chhattisgarh.
2 - Smt. Kusum Jain W/o Ashok Kumar Jain Aged About 49 Years R/o -
26/8, Sector Tatibandh Raipur Chhattisgarh
3 - National Insurance Company Limited Through Divisional Manager,
Divisional Office, Mobin Mahal G.E.R. Raipur Chhattisgarh.
... Respondents
[Cause-title taken from Case Information System (CIS)]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Appellants : Mr. A.L. Singroul, Advocate
For Respondent No.2 : Ms. Sweksha Sharma, Advocate
Page No.2 of 6
IN
MAC-36-2022
For Respondent No.3 : Mr. P.K. Tulsyan, Advocate
————————————————————————————————
Single Bench: Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal
(Order on Board)
04.08.2025
1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for
short the “Act of 1988”) has been preferred by the appellants seeking
enhancement of amount of compensation, challenging the impugned
award dated 29.09.2021, passed in Claim Case No.144 of 2019
(Parwati Sonkar and other v. Rakesh Mishra and others) by the Chief
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur (CG), whereby learned Claims
Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.16,82,500/- as compensation
for the death of Satyanarayan Sonkar, who was aged about 22 years on
the date of occurrence.
2. Facts of the case, relevant for disposal of this appeal, are that on
the date of occurrence i.e. 09.11.2018, while deceased- Satyanarayan
Sonkar was coming to Jai Stambh Chowk, Tilda from Simga and, at
about 9:30 PM, the respondent No.01- driver, who was driving the
offending vehicle i.e. Truck Trailer bearing No.CG-04-JC-3936 drove the
said vehicle in rash and negligent manner and dashed the deceased,
due to which, the deceased suffered injuries and died. Thereafter, the
appellants, who are wife, son, father and brother of the deceased
respectively, filed an application under Section 166 of the Act of 1988
seeking compensation to the tune of Rs.29,00,000/- pleading therein
that on the date of the accident, the deceased was 22 years of age and
Page No.3 of 6
IN
MAC-36-2022
used to earn Rs.500/- per day from the work of Marble Mason. The
deceased used to maintain his family members including his father and
brother and, after his death, his family members have no any source of
income to survive. Even otherwise, the deceased was aged about 22
years on the date of accident and was a able-bodied person and, on
account of his untimely death in the accident, the appellants have
suffered economical and psychological difficulties.
3. Respondents No.1 & 2 – driver and owner of the offending vehicle
submitted their reply to the claim application, while denying all the
adverse pleadings made in the application, it was further pleaded that
the accident was not caused by the aforesaid vehicle and the deceased
has died on account of his own carelessness, moreover, on the date of
the accident, the driver of the said vehicle was having valid driving
license as well as the said vehicle (Truck Trailer) was duly insured with
respondent No.3, therefore, the liability of compensation lies upon the
Insurance Company i.e. respondent No.3.
4. Respondent No. 3 i.e. the Insurance Company has opposed the
claim application stating that the said vehicle (Truck Trailer) was being
used in violation of terms and conditions of insurance policy.
5. Learned Claims Tribunal, upon appreciation of pleadings and
evidence placed on record by respective parties, held that deceased-
Satyanarayan Sonkar died in the accident arising out of rash and
negligent driving of the aforesaid vehicle i.e. Truck Trailer bearing
No.CG-04-JC-3936, which was driven by the respondent No.01 and
Page No.4 of 6
IN
MAC-36-2022
owned by respondent No.02 herein. Breach of conditions of insurance
policy was not found to be proved, and after calculating the amount of
compensation, awarded Rs.16,82,500/- as total compensation with
interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing of claim application.
6. Learned counsel for the appellants would submit that learned
Claims Tribunal has erred in awarding less amount of compensation in
the facts of the case. Claims Tribunal erred in assessing income of
deceased as Rs.7,800/- per month which should be Rs.8,100/- as per
Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification issued by the office of the
Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh. Therefore, the instant appeal be
allowed and the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal may
suitably be enhanced.
7. Learned counsel for the respondents would submit that the
appellants have failed to prove nature of occupation and income of the
deceased by producing clinching and admissible piece of evidence,
hence, the Tribunal is justified in assessing income of deceased on
notional basis. The amount of compensation awarded by the Claims
Tribunal is just and proper which does not call for any interference.
8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival
submissions made herein-above and went through the records with
utmost circumspection.
9. Learned Claims Tribunal assessed the monthly income of
deceased Satyanarayan Sonkar to be Rs.7,800/-, however, in the
Page No.5 of 6
IN
MAC-36-2022
opinion of this Court, as per the Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages
Notification issued by the office of Labour Commissioner, Chhattisgarh,
the monthly income of the deceased should be Rs.8,100/- PM (as per
minimum wages prescribed at relevant time) vis-a-vis Rs.97,200/- per
annum.
10. Thus, 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 Sethi1, Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs.
Delhi Transport Corporation & Ors2 and Magma General Insurance
Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors 3, this Court is computing
the compensation as below:-
Sr. Heads Compensation Compensation
No. awarded by the awarded by this
Tribunal Court
1. Income Rs.7,800 x 12 = Rs.8,100 x 12 =
Rs.93,600/- Rs.97,200/-
2. Deduction (-) 1/3 (-) 1/3 (i.e.
(Rs.31,200) = Rs.32,400) =
Rs. 62,400/- Rs. 64,800/-
3. Multiplier (x) 18 = (x) 18 = Rs.
Rs. 11,23,200/- 11,66,400/-
4. Future Prospect (+) 40% i.e. (+) 40% i.e. Rs.
Rs. 4,49,300 = 4,66,560 = Rs.
Rs.15,72,500/- 16,32,960/-
5. Loss of Estate Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 15,000/-
6. Funeral Expenses Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 15,000/-
7. Loss of spousal Consortium Rs. 40,000/- Rs. 40,000/-
1 (2017) 16 SCC 680
2 (2009) 6 SCC 121
3 (2018) 18 SCC 130
Page No.6 of 6
IN
MAC-36-2022
(for appellant No.1)
8. Loss of Consortium (for Rs.40,000/- Rs.40,000/-
appellants No.02 to 04)
Total Rs. 16,82,500/- Rs. 17,42,960/-
11. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the amount of compensation of
Rs.16,82,500/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced to
Rs.17,42,960/-. Hence, after deducting the amount of Rs.16,82,500/-,
the appellants are held entitled for an additional amount of Rs.60,460/-.
The concerned respondent is directed to deposit the amount of
compensation as enhanced by this Court within a period of 30 days
from the date of receipt of 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. 01.02.2019 till its
realization. Rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain
intact.
12. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed in part and the impugned
award is modified to the extent as indicated herein-above. The deposit
Tribunal shall pass appropriate order with regard to apportionment,
investment and disbursement of the enhanced amount of
compensation.
sd/-
(Sanjay K. Agrawal)
Judge
s@if