The Chhattisgarh High Court held that the minimum wages prescribed for skilled labourers must be used as the baseline for computing loss of income in motor accident compensation, if the deceased’s profession is established, thus clarifying the computation methodology. The judgment increases the compensation awarded based on this minimum wage standard and distinguishes from prior notional income assessments by tribunals. This decision serves as binding authority within the state for motor accident claims tribunals, impacting calculation of compensation for similarly situated claimants.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name |
MAC/834/2024 of SMT. HARA BAI SAHU Vs KESHVA RAM SAHU CNR CGHC010106602024 |
| Date of Registration | 23-04-2024 |
| Decision Date | 15-10-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | DISPOSED OFF |
| Judgment Author | HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAKESH MOHAN PANDEY |
| Court | High Court of Chhattisgarh |
| Bench | Single Bench (Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey) |
| Precedent Value |
Binding within the jurisdiction of Chhattisgarh; clarifies computation principles for Motor Accident Claims Tribunals |
| Type of Law |
|
| Questions of Law | Whether the compensation for loss of income in a motor accident claim should be calculated based on the minimum wage prescribed for skilled labourers when the deceased’s profession is established |
| Ratio Decidendi |
The High Court held that where the occupation of the deceased is established (here, a mason), the minimum wage for a skilled labourer, as per the State’s prevailing rates at the time of accident, must be taken as notional income for compensation calculations. The Tribunal erred by using a lower notional income not aligned with statutory minimum wages. Furthermore, compensation for loss of consortium must be awarded to all eligible claimants, correcting the omission of the Tribunal in this regard. Accordingly, the Court enhanced the awarded sum, ensuring the standards set forth by wage notification are strictly applied. |
| Judgments Relied Upon | Not specified in the judgment. |
| Logic / Jurisprudence / Authorities Relied Upon by the Court | Reference to the statutory minimum wages matrix in Chhattisgarh for skilled labourers. Specific case law or further authorities not detailed. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court |
The deceased, aged 29, was working as a mason and died in a road accident on 15.7.2022. The claimants (mother and minor child) filed for compensation. The Tribunal assessed notional income based on Rs.9,000/month instead of the prevailing statutory minimum of Rs.10,970/month, and did not award consortium to one claimant. The High Court revisited these figures and directed payment of enhanced compensation. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts and Motor Accident Claims Tribunals within Chhattisgarh |
| Persuasive For | Motor Accident Claims Tribunals and courts outside Chhattisgarh, especially in context of compensation calculations |
| Distinguishes | Distinguishes earlier awards that relied on notional incomes below the applicable statutory minimum wages, where the deceased’s skill is proved |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- The High Court mandates use of the minimum wage notified for skilled labourers in compensation computation for motor accident claimants whose profession is established.
- Rejects tribunal practice of fixing notional income below minimum wage where job category is clear.
- Clarifies that all eligible claimants are entitled to loss of consortium, correcting earlier omissions.
- Lawyers representing claimants should ensure that tribunals are provided with evidence of minimum wages applicable at the time of accident.
- This ruling should be cited in all similar compensation enhancement appeals in Chhattisgarh.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The Court found the Tribunal’s computation of notional income at Rs.9,000/month incorrect, since minimum wages for skilled labourers (Rs.10,970/month) were statutorily prescribed at the time of accident.
- The deceased’s profession as a mason was undisputed and falls within the skilled worker category.
- Therefore, the compensation calculation was revised to use Rs.10,970 per month as the base, along with the statutorily established criteria for future prospects, dependents’ deductions, and a 17x multiplier.
- The Court also noted the Tribunal’s omission in awarding consortium compensation to one claimant, and rectified it by awarding Rs.88,000/- under this head, as per standard entitlements.
- The resultant total compensation was therefore enhanced.
- No specific case law or authorities cited beyond reliance on minimum wage notification.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner
- The Tribunal failed to apply the minimum wage of Rs.10,970/month for skilled labourers, wrongly taking the deceased’s notional income as Rs.9,000/month.
- Tribunal did not award compensation for loss of consortium to one eligible claimant.
- Sought enhancement of compensation accordingly.
Respondent (Insurance Company)
- The compensation awarded by the Tribunal was just and proper.
- Opposed the appeal for enhancement.
No appearance or submissions by Owner/Driver (Respondent No.1) are recorded.
Factual Background
The deceased, a 29-year-old mason, died in a road accident on 15.7.2022. His mother and minor child filed a claim for compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The Tribunal fixed notional income at Rs.9,000/month and passed an award. The claimants appealed, seeking enhancement, arguing the income should be based on the skilled labourers’ minimum wage and that one claimant was not given loss of consortium.
Statutory Analysis
- The Court analyzed the prevailing minimum wage notifications in Chhattisgarh for skilled labourers at the time of the accident and held these rates are binding for compensation calculation where the deceased’s occupation is established.
- Section 166, Motor Vehicles Act: Governs compensation claims for accidental death.
- The Court did not expand or “read down” any statutory provision, but enforced the minimum wage rates as mandatory for loss of income calculation in this context.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – Judgment applies statutory minimum wage rates and standard heads of compensation, ensuring legal correctness and rectification of earlier computation errors.