IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE HIRDESH

th

ON THE 24 OF FEBRUARY, 2026 MISC. APPEAL No. 3019 of 2018 SMT. SOMVATI AND OTHERS Versus RAJENDRA SINGH KUSHWAH AND OTHERS Appearance:

Sri Akhilesh Gupta -Advocate for appellants/claimants Shri Badri Nath Malhotra-Advocate for respondent No.3/Insurance Company.

ORDER This miscellaneous appeal has been preferred by the appellants/claimants under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, being aggrieved by the Award dated 08/03/2018 passed by the Third Additional Member Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gwalior (M.P.) (hereinafter referred to as “the Claims Tribunal”) in Claim Case No.404/2016, on the grounds of inadequacy of compensation and seeking enhancement of compensation. 2. The date of accident, negligence, and liability are not in dispute. The findings recorded by the Claims Tribunal on these aspects have attained finality and are not under challenge in the present appeal.

3. As per the findings recorded by the Claims Tribunal, in the case of death of Ganga Singh in the motor accident, the Claims Tribunal awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.5,42,850/- along with interest in favour of claimants.

4. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the learned Claims Tribunal erred in assessing the income of the deceased on the lower side. It is submitted that deduction towards personal expenses was incorrectly made, the multiplier applied was on the lower side, no future prospects were awarded, and the compensation granted under conventional heads was inadequate. Therefore, the overall compensation awarded is unjust and deserves enhancement.

5. On the other hand, learned counsel for Insurance Company supported the impugned award and submitted that the Claims Tribunal has rightly assessed the compensation based on the evidence available on record. It is contended that the appeal lacks merit and deserves dismissal.

6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the Claims Tribunal.

7. Upon consideration of the submissions and on perusal of the record, it is found that Claims Tribunal has rightly assessed income of deceased i.e.

Rs. 6575/- per month.

8. With regard to future prospects, in light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, 2017 ACJ 2700, the claimants are entitled to future prospects at the rate of 40%. Further, as per Sarla Verma & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr. , (2009) 6 SCC 121, considering the age of the deceased, the appropriate multiplier of 18 should be applied by Claims Tribunal. Also, in view of the judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of United India Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Satinder Kaur and Others reported in 2020 ACJ 2131, the claimants are entitled to get compensation towards loss of consortium and loss of estate and the dependency is required to be assessed after deducting 1/2 of personal expenses of his income.

9. Accordingly, the appellants/claimants are entitled to receive compensation under the following heads:-

HEAD AMOUNT Income Rs.6575 x 12= Rs.78,900/- P.A.

After adding Future Prospects @40% Rs.31,560/- After deduction of Dependency 1/2 Rs.55,230/-

Multiplier 18 Rs.9,94,140/-

Other Heads:-

Loss of Consortium Rs.40,000 X 2 = Rs.80,000/-

Loss of Estate and funeral expenses Rs.30,000/-

Total = Rs.11,04,140/-

10. Thus, the just and proper amount of compensation payable in the present case comes to Rs.11,04,140/- as against the sum of Rs.5,42,850/- awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal. Accordingly, the appellants/claimants are held entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.5,61,290/- over and above the amount already awarded by the Tribunal.

11. Consequently, this miscellaneous appeal is partly allowed. The impugned award is modified, and the compensation is enhanced by Rs.5,61,290/-. The enhanced amount shall carry interest at the same rate as awarded by the Claims Tribunal from the date of deposit of court fee and shall be