HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH -»1 CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. HON'BLE SHRI G. MINHAJUDDIN, J Misc Appeal (0 No. 982 of2008. 1 Ram Bilas Dhruv S/o Sardhu Dhruv, Aged about 40 years. 2 Smt. Munga Bai, W.o Ram Bilas Dhruv, Aged about 35 years. Both are R/o village Turma, Police Station Kasdol, Tahsii Baloda Bazar, District Raipur (C.G.). VERSUS Kranti Kumar Sahu, S/o Narottam Sahu, Aged about 41 years, R/o Village Turma, Potice Station Kasdol, Tahsil Baloda Bazar, District Raipur (C.G.). MisceElaneous Appeal under Section 173 of IVIotor Vehicles Act Present : Shri C.R. Sahu and Shri C.K. Sahu, counsel for the appellants. Shri M.D. Sharma, counsel forthe respondent. Respondents ORDER rth (17tnAugust,2011) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. The unfortunate parents of deceased Suresh Kumar are the appellants before us in this appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the First Additional Motor Accident € ^- 8:& J / M.A.C. No. 982 of 2008 1Y Claims Tribunal, Baloda Bazar (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 25.04.2008, passed in Claim Case No.22/2007. 2) As against the compensatlon of Rs.15,00,000/-, claimed by the appellants/claimants, unfortunate parents of deceased Suresh Kumar, by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 21.06.2007, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,70,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of filing of the ciaim petition till the date of actual payment. 3) The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it hetd that the claimants' son Suresh Kumar died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 21.06.2007; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the motorcyclist of the motorcycle bearing registration Nos.CG-04 -CM/6037; the owner-cum-driver of the motorcycle, therefore, was liable to pay compensation to the claimants. 4) As the respondent has not filed any appeal against the impugned award, the above findings recorded by the Tribunal have now attained finality. 5) The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- per annum. By deducting 1/3rd of Rs.15,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.10,000/- per annum. By multiplylng the annual dependency of Rs,10,000/- with the multiplier of 16, the compensation was worked out to Rs.1,60,000/-. By awarding >\- MAC.No. 982 of2008 ^: further sum of Rs.10,000/- under other heads, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,70,000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of their son Suresh Kumar in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.1,70,000/- @ 7% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri C.R. Sahu and Shri C.K. Sahu, learned counsel for the appeltants submitted that the Tribunai has erred in awarding low compensation of Rs.1,70,000/- only though the claimants' son Suresh Kumar would have extended great support to the appellants in their otd age. 7) Shri M.D. Sharma, learned counsel for respondent Kranti Kumar Sahu, the owner-cum-driver ofthe offending motorcycle, on the other hand contended that the Tribunal has liberally awarded excessive sum of Rs.1,70,000/- as compensation to the claimants. 8) Deceased Suresh Kumar was aged about 18 years on the date of the accident. The claimants are his father aged about 40 years and mother aged about 35 years. Claimant No.1 Ram Bilas Dhruv is an agriculturist owning 2-3 acres of land in the village. The claimants pleaded that theirson Suresh Kumar used to earn Rs.150-200/- per day as Mason. The Tribunal has awarded lump-sum of Rs.10,000/- under other conventional heads. 9) The compensation of Rs.1 ,70,000/- awarded by the Tribunal when examined in the context of the above mentioned broad \-. 4 MAC.No. 982 of 2008 features of the case, in our opinion, is somewhat on the lower side and deserves to be enhanced to some extent. 10) Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, we are of the opinion that further award of Rs.10,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation would make the compensation of Rs.1,70,000/- awarded by the Tribunal as just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 11) The appeal filed by the appellants/claimants for enhancement of the compensation, therefore, is allowed in part. The claimants are awarded further sum of Rs.10,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation, in addition to the sum of Rs.1,70,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. 12) Respondent Kranti Kumar Sahu, the owner-cum-driver of the offending motorcycle is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.10,000/- before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 13) No order as to costs. Sd/- ChiefJustice Sd/- G.Minhajjudin Judge subbu 'v . -