IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGA_RH AT BILASPUR M.A. [C] ^•^-f) / 2007 [D.B.] / *.! APPELLANT : MARYADI DEVI, W/0 LATE SHRI KALPNATH YADAV @ KALPU , R/0 BEHIND KOHKA MEDICAL STORE , KOHKA , BHILAI, TAH. 8s DISTT. DURG. v/s RESPONDENTS^/^" 1. ARVIND NATH, Through : AMI PANKAJ MODI, B/6, AYODHYA NAGARI, JADESHWAR, TAH. 8s DISTT. BHARUCH GUJRAT. 392001. 2. AMI PANKAJ MODI, B/6 AYODHYA NAGARI , JADESHWAR, TAH. & DISTT. BHARUCH, GUJRAT. 392001. 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. <^f THROUGH : DIVISIONAL MANAGER, KACHERI ROAD, RAIPUR.DISTT. RAIPUR. APPEAL U/S 173 MOTOR VEHICLE ACT. 1988 FOR ENHANCEMENT v/w -.• ^y ^ 'N'BLE V.K. SHRiVASTAVA. J. s-&r"'T's. 'aa', uevi Versus Awind Nath & Others Present: Shri Amiyakant Tiwari, counset for the appellant. None for the respondents. iRT !7) The following ora! order of the Court was passed by This is an appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehtcies Act, 1988 (henceforth "the Act, 19S8") filed by the appeilant/ciaimant, who is mother of deceased hieera Lai, for enhancement of compensation, against the avi/ard dated 3-8-2005 passed by the Seventh Additional Motor Accident Ciaims Tribunal (Fast Track Court), Durg (henceforth "the Tribunai") in Ciaim case No.38 of 2005. (2) The factual matrix of the case, in brief, is that on 14-9-2000 when Heera Lal (since deceased) was travelling in an auto rickshaw bearing registration No. GJ-5-TT/1711, respondent No.1 (driver) driving tempo bearing registration No.GJ-16-8384 in a rash and negtigent manner dashed the auto rickshaw, resultantiy Heera Lal sustained injuries and succumbed to those. Appe!!ant - mother of the deceased fiied an application under Section 166 of the Act, 1988 for compsnsation against respondents, who are driver, owner and insurer of the ofending vehicle. M Rsspondsnts No.1 and 2 remained ex parte whersas respondent No.3 contested the claim. (3) Learned Tribupai aftev appreciating the evidence adduced by the appeljant, awarded compensation vide impugned award as below: S.No. Head Amount 1. Dependency 1,80,000=00 2. Lovs & Affsction 5,000=00 3. Funeral Expenses 2,000=00 Totai: 1,87,000=00 (4) Learned counsei for the appeilant contended that the Tribuna! erred in recording the income of the decsased, and thsreby awariS.ng compensatlon on tower side. (5) We perused the av/ard passed by the Tribunal. Claimant is the mother of the deceased, who is aged about 50 years. There is no legal evidence to prove the income of the deceased, however, learned Tribunal in viev/ of existing labour charges, recorded annuai dependency as Rs.12,000/- and appiying muitiplisr of 15, aliowed compensation towards dependency. Aithough muitiplier appiied by the Tribunal is on higher sids, yet in absence of objection or counter appea!, that cannot be interfered wlth. (6) We do not find any pen/ersity or infinnity in the finding recorded by the Tribunal so as io condemn it. In the result, the appeal being devoid' of substance deserves to be dismissed summarily and is accordingly dismissed in lim'ne. No costs. . Sd/- ChiefJustice Gowri Sd/- V.K.Shrivastava Judge