Chhattisgarh High Court
MAC/484/2025 of PARWATI SAHU Vs ANIL KUMAR SAHU on 29 September 2026
2026:CGHC:42557 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 484 of 2025 1 - Parwati Sahu Wd/o Late Vishnu Sahu Aged About 25 Years R/o Village And Post- Padiyain- Police Station- Pathriya, District- Mungeli ( C.G. ). At Present Through- Ramsharan Sahu- Ashok Nagar Road, Murum
CGHC010074592025
2026:CGHC:42557
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MAC No. 484 of 2025
1 - Parwati Sahu Wd/o Late Vishnu Sahu Aged About 25 Years R/o Village And Post- Padiyain- Police Station- Pathriya, District- Mungeli ( C.G. ). At Present Through- Ramsharan Sahu- Ashok Nagar Road, Murum Khadan, Police Station- Sarkanda, District- Bilaspur ( C.G. ).
2 - Tanya Sahu D/o Late Vishnu Sahu Aged About 5 Years Minor Through- The Mother (Natural Guardian) Smt. Parwati Sahu, (Appellant No. (01) R/o Village And Post- Padiyain- Police Station- Pathriya, District- Mungeli ( C.G. ). At Present Through- Ramsharan Sahu- Ashok Nagar Road, Murum Khadan, Police Station- Sarkanda, District- Bilaspur ( C.G. ).
3 - Gyan Sahu S/o Late Baisakhu Sahu Aged About 21 Years R/o Village And Post- Padiyain- Police Station- Pathriya, District- Mungeli ( C.G. ). At Present Through- Ramsharan Sahu- Ashok Nagar Road, Murum Khadan, Police Station- Sarkanda, District- Bilaspur ( C.G. ).
4 - Ramkunwar Sahu Wd/o Late Baisakhu Sahu Aged About 63 Years R/o Village And Post- Padiyain- Police Station- Pathriya, District- Mungeli ( C.G. ). At Present Through- Ramsharan Sahu- Ashok Nagar Road, Murum Khadan, Police Station- Sarkanda, District- Bilaspur ( C.G. ).
... Appellants
versus
1 - Anil Kumar Sahu S/o Manohar Lal Sahu Aged About 28 Years R/o Village And Post- Padiyain, Police Station- Pathriya, District- Mungeli
( C.G. ). ( Driver And Owner Of The Vehicle Motor Cycle No. C.G. 28/j/
2 - Tata A. I. G. General Insurance Company Limited, Through- Branch Manager- Branch Office 4th ( Floor, Gwalani Chamber, Office No. T-08
Near I.C.I.C.I. Bank, Main Road, Vyapar Vihar, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur ( C.G. ).(Insurer Of The Vehicle Motor Cycle No. C.G. 28/J/
... Respondents
For Appellants
:
Mr. Anand Kesharwani, Advocate.
For Respondents
:
None
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal, J.
Order on Board
(30.09.2026)
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Heard on admission.
2. This is the claimants’ appeal for enhancement against the award dated 22.01.2025 passed by the 2nd Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur (C.G.) in Claim Case No.1587/2023 whereby a compensation amount of Rs.24,72,816/- has been awarded on account of the death of Vishnu Sahu, who succumbed to the injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 23.08.2023.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants submits that the learned Tribunal has wrongly assessed the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.10,480/-, despite their pleading to the effect that the deceased was earning Rs.30,000/- per month by doing catering business. Learned counsel, accordingly, prays that the income of the deceased be reassessed at a higher rate and the compensation amount awarded by the learned Tribunal may be enhanced accordingly.
4. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the appellants and perused the award impugned.
5. In the case in hand, though the appellants/claimants pleaded before the learned Tribunal that the deceased at the time of accident was earning Rs.30,000/- per month by doing catering business, but there is no documentary or reliable evidence on record to established such pleading of the appellants/claimants, and the learned Tribunal considering that the accident occurred on 23.08.2023, and according to the minimum wages notification issued by the Labour Department, the minimum wages prescribed for an unskilled labourer at the relevant time were Rs.10,480/- per month, which has also been taken into consideration by the learned Tribunal. There is no material on record to establish that the deceased was earning anything more than the aforesaid amount. Therefore, this Court finds no basis to assess the income at a higher rate than Rs.10,480/- per month.
6. Having carefully perused the material on record, this Court is of the considered view that the Tribunal has judiciously appreciated the evidence and there is no evidence to hold that the deceased was earning Rs.30,000/- per month by doing catering business. The quantum of compensation awarded is fair and proper. There is no legal or factual infirmity in the impugned award warranting for interference by this Court.
7. Accordingly, the appeal of the appellants is hereby dismissed at the admission stage itself. No order as to cost. Sd/-
(Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge pekde