HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISIONBENCH HON'BLESHR|RAJEEVGUPTA,CJ.& HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J. Misc. ADpeal No. 40 of2004 ADpellants Appiicants Respondents Non-appiiGants 1. Nagesiya Bai, aged 24 years, Wd/o Chaklal alias Cheklal allas Nanuk Marar. 2. Kumari Bhukhan Bai D/o Chaklal Marar, minor through mother Nagesiya Bai. 3. Kawal, aged 55 years S/o Kartik. 4. Sohatiya Bai, aged 50 years W/o Kawal Marar, All resklent of Daniyakhurd, P.S. Sahaspur Lohara, Tah. Kawardha, Distt. Kabirdham (C.G.) VERSUS 1. Nilkanth Ghodu Chowdhury, aged 24 years, S/o Bebala, R/o Barora Tah. SDtstt.Chandarpur(M.S.) 2. Sanjay Kymar D. Jain S/o not known R/o near Jolibedbrij, Tah. & distt. Chandrapur(M.S.) 3. United india Insurance Company Limited, Branch Amrit Bhawan,] M.G. Road, Chandrapur, Maharashtra. ARpeal underSection 173ofthe Mbtor Vehicles Act. 1988 Present: iShri H.V. Sharma, counsel 'fortheappellants. |None forrespondentsNo. 1 &2. |Shri Dashrath ©upta,counserfpr respondent lNo:.3. •: :: i •::1' : . - • II 1 ^ \^ QRDER >nd (22na September, 2010) The following opder of the Court was passed by 'J&f ^nJ< « This is claimants' appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kawardha (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 15.10.2003, passedinClaim Case No. 72/2002. 2) As against the compensationof Rs.1&,00,000/-clajmed by the appellants/claimants, unfortynate widow, minor daughter and parents of deceased Chaklal @ Cheklal @ Nanuk Marar, by filing a claim petition under Sectjon 166 of the Motor Vehicies Act, for his death in the motoraccidenton 24.02.1998, the Tribunal awarded a totatsum ofRs.2,68,700/-ascompensation along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition tillthe date ofactual payment. 3) The Tribunal on a close scrufiny of the entire evidence led before it held that deceased Chaklal @ Cheklal @ Nanuk Marar died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accldent on 24.02.1998; the aceident occurreddue to rash and negligent dri^iftg of the driver of the offending vehjcle Truck bearing registrati'on No.M.H.34/A/433; as the above offending vehicte Truck on the date ofthe accident was insured with the United India Insurance Company Limited and the Insurance lCompany couldinot establishany breachof the policyconditioiTs, rf''~'l-^'- .•'' if^WS \ the Insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimants. 4) The Tribunal assessed the incomeof fhe deceased at Rs.60/- per day; Rs.1,800/- per month; and Rs.21,600/- per annum. By deducti.ng 1/3 orRs.21,60p/- towards the personai expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.14,400/- per annum.By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.14,400/- with the multiplier of 18, the compensation was worked out to Rs.2,59,200/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.9,500/- under other heads, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.2,68,700/- as compensation to the claimants for thedeath of deceased Chaklal @. Cheklal @ Nanuk Marar in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of intereston the above amount of compensation of Rs.2,68,700/- @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 5) Shri H.V.Sharma, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the .claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased and jn assessing ,his inGbme at Rs.60/- per day; Rs.1,800/- per month; / • ' ' and Rs.21,600/- per annum only; and in awardjng low "*• : ; compensation of Rs.2,68,700/- only. 6) Shri Dashrath Gupta, learned counsel for respondent No.3 the United India Insurance Company Limitedon the other hand suppdrted the award andcontended that as the claimants could -r \ il not estabtish the income of the deceased as pleaded by them, the compensation of Rs.2,68,700/- awarded by the Tribunal is justand proper compensation in the facts and circumstancesof the present case. 7) True.the claimants pleaded that deceased Chaklal @ Cheklal @ Nanuk Marar used to earn Rs.3,000-4,000/- per month by working as Coolie/Hamal for uhloading the coal from the Trucks, the evidence leci in that behalf was not of clinching nature. In fact, it has come in the evidence of the witnesses examined by the claimants that during the rainy season the deceased was not getting sufficient work. In this state of evidence, we do not find anyfault in the approach ofthe Tribunal in discarding the claimants' evidence about the inGome of the deceased to the extent of Rs.3,000-4,000/- per month. 8) Nevertheless, the income of the deceased assessed by the Tribunai at Rs,60/- per day; Rs.1,800/- per month; and Rs21,600/- per annum is certainly somewhaton thelower side and requjres reconsideration. 9} Considering that deceased Chaklal @ Cheklal @ Nanuk Marar was aged-about 30 years on the date of the accident, we ' / : . , . , are ofthe opinion that he could have easily earned Rs.2,000/-per month. We, therefore, propose to recpmpute the compensation taking the income of the deceased at Rs.2,000/- per month and Rs.24,000/- per annum. t .€' ^ ^ 10) By deducting the usual 1/3r11 of Rs.24,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency is assessed at Rs.16,000/- per annum. 11) COnsidering the age of the deceased, his widow and daughter, we are ofthe opinionthat the multiplier of 17 would be appropriate in the present case. 12) By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.16,000/- with the multiplier of 17, the compensationWorksout to Rs.2,72,000/-. The claimants are further entitled to receive Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses; Rs.5,000/- for loss of estate; and Rs.5,000/- for loss ofconsortium to the widow. The claimants, thus, become entitled to receive a total sum of Rs.2,87,000/- as compensation for the death of deceased Chaklal @ Chektal @. Nanuk Marar in the motor accident. 13) The claimants are further awarded asum of Rs.2,700/-as quantified amount of interest on the enhaneed amount of compensation of Rs.18,300/-. 14) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants/ Glaimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. ~The compensation of Rs.2,68,700/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.2,87,000/- with further quantified amount of interest of Rs.2,700/- on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.18,300/-. 15) Respondent No.3 The United India Insurance Company jLjrnited is granted three months' time for depositing the totalsum r v L.\ni of Rs.21,OQO/- (Rs.18,300/- towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.2,700/- towards quantified amount of interest oo the enhanced amountofcompensation of Rs.18,300/-) before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 16) No order asto costs. ~ . --, ^ Sd/- ChiefJustice 'A. Sd/- R.N.Chandrakar Judge nimmi