Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | MAC/335/2022 of SMT. ROOPA BAI NISHAD Vs RAJU @ LALA KAUSHIK CNR CGHC010077082022 |
| Date of Registration | 04-03-2022 |
| Decision Date | 02-09-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | PARTLY ALLOWED |
| Judgment Author | Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal |
| Court | High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur |
| Bench | Single Judge Bench |
| Precedent Value | Binding on all subordinate courts |
| Overrules / Affirms | Affirms and applies Supreme Court precedents |
| Type of Law | Motor Vehicles Act, Tort Law |
| Questions of Law |
|
| Ratio Decidendi |
The Court held that in absence of direct proof of income, monthly income must be computed as per the state minimum wages notification; future prospects and customary heads (consortium, estate, funeral expenses) must be enhanced in line with Supreme Court precedents; deduction of 25% for personal expenses and application of the appropriate multiplier (16) follows Sarla Verma, Pranay Sethi, and Magma General Insurance; interest at 6% from date of claim is payable on the enhanced amount. |
| Judgments Relied Upon |
|
| Logic / Jurisprudence / Authorities Relied On |
Chhattisgarh Minimum Wages Notification (labour category); established multipliers and heads of claim under Sections 163A/173 MV Act as refined by Supreme Court; methodology for notional income and enhancement of components of compensation |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court |
The claimants—wife and minor children of a 32-year-old labourer—filed Claim Case No. 08/2021 under the MVA after his death in a road accident; the tribunal awarded ₹9,77,200; appellants challenged only the quantum, seeking income at ₹8,960 pm and higher consortium, estate and funeral heads. |
| Citations | 2025:CGHC:44737; MAC No. 335/2022 |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts within Chhattisgarh |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts; Motor Accident Claims Tribunals |
| Follows |
|
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- In absence of direct proof of earnings, minimum wages notification is binding for notional income calculations.
- Future prospects must be added at 40% for a labourer category.
- A standard deduction of 25% from the aggregate annual income applies.
- Multiplier must align with the deceased’s age (16 for age 32).
- Consortium, estate and funeral heads are to be enhanced in line with prevailing market standards.
- Interest on enhanced compensation is payable at 6% per annum from date of claim petition.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The tribunal fixed monthly income at ₹4,500 without admissible proof; appellants argued for ₹8,960 as per Minimum Wages Notification.
- Court held that in absence of proof, notification wage (₹8,960 pm; ₹1,07,520 pa) governs notional income.
- Added 40% future prospects (₹43,008) to arrive at total ₹1,50,528.
- Deducted 25% for personal living expenses (₹37,632), yielding ₹1,12,896.
- Applied multiplier 16 → ₹18,06,336.
- Added heads: loss of estate (₹18,000), funeral expenses (₹18,000), consortium (₹1,92,000).
- Total enhanced compensation: ₹20,34,336; additional ₹10,57,136 over tribunal award, with 6% interest from 12-01-2021.
- Relied on Sarla Verma, Pranay Sethi, Magma General Insurance for methodology.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner
- Monthly income wrongly fixed at ₹4,500; should follow Minimum Wages Notification (₹8,960).
- Consortium, estate and funeral expenses undervalued; deserve enhancement.
Respondent No. 3 (Insurer)
- No admissible proof of income; notional income at tribunal’s level justified.
- Award of ₹9,77,200 was fair and need not be disturbed.
Respondents No. 1 & 2 (Driver & Owner)
- Contest liability to pay any compensation.
Factual Background
A 32-year-old labourer and agriculturist died in a road accident. His widow and three minor children filed a claim petition under the Motor Vehicles Act. The Claims Tribunal awarded ₹9,77,200. The High Court, on appeal under Section 173 MV Act, re-computed compensation by applying the state Minimum Wages Notification and settled heads of claim, enhancing the award to ₹20,34,336.
Statutory Analysis
- Appeal entertained under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
- Compensation calculation follows statutory framework under Sections 163A/166 MV Act as interpreted by Supreme Court.
- Use of state Minimum Wages Notification as proxy for actual earnings in absence of direct evidence.
- Application of standard deduction (25%) and multiplier principle as per judicial precedents.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – Affirms and applies established Supreme Court methodology for motor accident compensation.
Citations
- (2017) 16 SCC 680 (Pranay Sethi)
- (2009) 6 SCC 121 (Sarla Verma)
- (2018) 18 SCC 130 (Magma Gen. Ins. Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram)
- 2025:CGHC:44737 (High Court of Chhattisgarh judgment)