/-V^-^ -^•^-Y.-^-V-L^-^-^'^L/ -^O &! c.^</'AA INTHEHONBLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR "OF 2009 M.A.(C)No. ^^^-OF: (APPEAL VALUED AT Rs.4.28.500/-) APPEALUNDER SECTION173 OFTHE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT. 1988. ^ APPELLANTS (NON- APPLICANT N0.3) t ^.l.^<^ ^' •.;5"^^"' ^-•"" (NON- APPLICANT N0.6) Bm United India Insurance Corapany Liraited, Branch- Office-2, Medical Chowk Nagpur, Distt. Nagpur (Mah.) Through: Its Divisional Manager, Divisional-Office, Krishna Coraplex-1st floor, Kuchery chowk, Raipur, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.) United India Insurance Company Limited, Branch- Office 2, Jagdalpur (CG) Through: Its Divisional Manager, Divisional-Office, Krishna Complex-lst floor, Kuchery chowk, Raipur, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.) » RESPONDENTS (APPLICANT N0, [ fi:l't Lu f^ VERSUS Bhagirathi Sahu, S/o- Prabhuram Sahu, aged about 40 years, (APPLICANT N0:2) ^:2. ^ Dipika Sahu, D/o Bhagirathi Sahu, aged about- 12years, (APPLICANT N0:3) ^. ^ Kusum Sahu, D/o^Bhagirathi Sahu, aged about- 10 years, (APPLICANT N0:4) ^:4.^ Pooja Sahu, D/o Bhagirathi Sahu, aged about- 10 years, Respondent no.2 to 4 are minor, through their father- Bhagirathi sahu,(respondent no.l) (NON-APPLICANT :5. N0.1) (NON-APPLICANT N0.2) (NON-APPLICANT N0.4) (NON-APPLICANT N0.5) :6. :7. ; :8. ^ Respondent No.l to 4 all are R/0-vill.-Arasnara, Tah. 85 Distt.-Diu-g (CG). Bhaskar Bante, S/0-Namdeo Bante, R/0- Mundipar,Bamni,P.S.-Sakoli, Distt.-Bhandara (Maharastra) (Driver). Shabbir Khan, S/0-Dilawar Khan, R/0- Geetawada, Maldarpura, Nagpiir(Maharastra). Bablu Giri, S/O-Late Vinod KumarGiri, R/0-through- Raingopal Chaudhary, KailashNagar, Kurud, Tah. & Distt.-Diirg (CG). Shivendra Jha, S/0- Sudhanshu Shekhar Jha, R/0- Niyanar, P.S. Parpa, Distt. Bastar (Jagdalpur)(CG). HIGH^OURTOFCHHATTISGARH^BI^^^ DB: APPBLLANTS; RBSPONDENTS: HON'BLB I. M. QUDDUSI fis HON'BLE G. MINHAJUDDIN, JJ M.A(C1 No. 1417/2009 United ludia Insurance Co, Ltd,, & anoth.er Vs. Bagirafhi Sahu & others MISC. APPEAL UNDBR SECTION 173 OF THB MOTOR VBHICLBS ACT, 1988 Appearaiice: Mr. Daslii'afh Gupta, counsel for the appeUaats, Mr, Basant Kaiwartya, counsel for fhe respondents 1 to 3, Per LM. QUDDUSI, J, ORAL ORDER (27.08.2011) ^-' This appeal has been filed by fhe Insuraace Conipaay agauist fhe impugned award dated 15.07,2009 passed by the XI Addl. Motor Accident Claiais Tribunal, Durg, Distt. Durg (C.G) in Claim Case No.48/2007. Bnef facts of fhe case as per the version of fhe clamiaiits are tliat on 29,9.2006 deceased Rekha Saliu, wtfe of respondent no.l aad raofher of respondents 2 to 4 was retimiiag along- witih. ofhers froni Dongargarh after Devi Darshan. by Bolero Jeep bearing Regn.No.C.G.18-D/0221. On the way, near viUage Kopedih, aTruckbearing Regn.No. M.H-31-AP/1094 (for short coffending vehicle') which was bemg driven by respondeut no.5 Bhaskar Baiite, m a rash aad negUgent manner, came from opposite direction aiid dashed fhe Bolero Jeep, as a result ^;-^ ^€^ VSff^h 'l ff / ^, ^.^^/ ^ of which Rekha Sahu sustaiaed grievous im.uries and died, The ofher occupants ofthe jeep have also siiffered iiijuries. The clamiaats being legal representatives have filed Claim Petition u/s 166 ofthe Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for fhe award oftotal coinpensation of Rs,5,74, 944/- pleading fhat her niontiily uiconiewas Rs.2031/-, 3. The learaed claiois Tribunal has held that offendm.g vehicle was iavolved ia ttie accident iti which the deceased died; tiiere was no breach of conditions of the Insuran.ee PoUcy aad fhe clamiaiits are entiUed to receive a total coinpensation of Rs.4,28,500/- froni tlie nou-appMcaats joiaUy aad severally. 4. We have heard learaed counsel for tlie parties aad have also goae through fhe records of the Tribunal. 5. The deceased was workiag as Anganbady worker aiid was drawiag a nionth.ly salary of Rs.1031/-. Besides fhis, she was also earaiag Rs. 1000/- per raonfh by workiag as sales inaa. As such, it was pleaded iii the claun petition that fhe uicoBie of the deceased was Rs,2031/- per monfh. However, fhe Tribunal has assessed the mcome as Rs.3000/- per nionth which is not appropriate. Smce fhe claimaats have pleaded fhe monfhly iacoiae as Rs.2031/-, it would be appropnate to take the iacoine of deceased ia round figure fhat is Rs,2000/-, which amounts to Rs,24,000/- per anjiuni, After deductiag l/3rd towards personal expenses, tlie reraiader/amiual loss of dependency coines to Rs.16000/-. The Tribunal has adopted multipUer 16 which seems to on higher side. Accordmg to flie High School Examiaation Certificate (Ex.P,15) offhe deceased, at fhe tmie of accident, she was aged about 37 Y2 years, fherefore, according to fhe raultipller scale given ia Sarla ^'^ ^'"-',,.,.lp' "f^fs^^^' Vermn (Sfnt.) -vs- Delhi Transp^rt Corporcstion and anothers (2009) 6 SCC 121, multiplier 15 would be applicable. On applyiag raultiplier 15, the total loss of dependency comes to Rs.2,40,000/-(Rs. 16000 x 15). Besides fhis, fhe husbaad is entitled to get Rs.5000/- for loss of consortiuni; Rs.5000/- for loss of estate aad Rs,5000/~ for funeral expenses which ia aU coiaes t6 Rs.15,000/- under tlie other heads, If we add this aiaoiuit, the total amount of compeusation coiues to Rs.2,55,000/- whereas tiie Tribunal has awarded Rs.4,28,500/- which, ia our opiaion, is excessive and the saiae is Uable to be reduced to Rs.2,55,000/-. This amount shall also carry simple iaterest @ 8% per aanuni, as granted by the Claims Tribiinal, froni fhe date of filuig of claun petition tiU fhe payraent is niade. At fhis stage, Mr. Dashrath Gupta subinits tliat tlie appeUaiit/Insuraace Compaay has akeady deposited Rs.3,34,328/- witli the Claicas Tribunal on 12.10.2009. In our opraion, this amount appears to be adequate iacludiag iaterest and coiinsel fee, Therefore, fhe award is niade to fhe extent of Rs.3,34,328/- plus interest accnied fhereon. In the result, the appeal is aUowed ia part. No order as to cost. Rao Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- G. Minhajuddin Judge