Authority: High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur

Order Date: 10 September 2026

Case Overview

  • Appellants: Naveen Yadav (26), Manju Yadav (24), Komal Yadav (21), residing at Indira Colony, Mandir Hasaud, Police Station Mandir Hasaud, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
  • Respondents: Sanjay Kushwaha (30), driver of Trailer No. C.G. 04 J.C. 4162, through Daman Transport, Kabir Nagar, Raipur; Sandeep Kaur, owner of the same trailer, residing at M I G 20, Kabir Nagar, Tatibandh, Raipur; The New India Insurance Company Ltd., represented by its Divisional Manager (Division No. 2), Jeevan Beema Marg, Pandari, Raipur.
  • The appeal challenged the award dated 23 June 2026 passed by the 04th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur (Case No. 238/2024), which granted a total compensation of Rs 14,81,500 to the appellants.
  • Grounds of appeal: alleged error in assessing the deceased Sitaram Yadav’s monthly income. Counsel argued the deceased earned Rs 24,000 per month as a crane operator with Aryan Associates, not the Rs 10,000 minimum‑wage figure used by the Tribunal.
  • Evidence: PW‑3 Anil Kumar Paswan testified that the deceased was a crane operator earning Rs 24,000 per month but admitted he had no documentary evidence (no salary slip, passbook, or bank statement) to substantiate this claim. The only document produced was a salary slip (Ex.P‑18) showing Rs 11,200 for 14 days of work in April 2023.
  • Tribunal’s calculation:

1. Notional monthly income: Rs 10,000 → Annual Rs 1,20,000.

2. Added 25% for future prospect: Rs 30,000 → Rs 1,50,000.

3. Deduction of 1/3 for personal and living expenses: Rs 50,000 → Rs 1,00,000.

4. Dependency multiplier (13): Rs 1,00,000 × 13 = Rs 13,00,000.

5. Funeral expenses: Rs 18,150.

6. Loss of estate: Rs 18,150.

7. Loss of love and affection: Rs 1,45,200 (calculated as Rs 48,400 × 3).

8. Total compensation: Rs 14,81,500.

Final Outcome

  • The Court held that the Tribunal correctly relied on the minimum‑wage basis due to the absence of reliable documentary evidence of a higher income.
  • No merit was found in the appeal; the Tribunal’s award stands.
  • The appeal is dismissed at the admission stage.

Topics: Motor Accident Compensation, Judicial Decision