\ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, CJ. & HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J. Misc.ADpeal (C) No.395of 2011 Appellants Respondents 1. 2. Ramvilas Verma, S/o Rikhi Ram , Verma, aged about 31 years; Smt Nira Bai, W/o Ramvilas Verma, aged about 26.years; Both are resident of Murmuda, PS Ghumka, District - Rajnandgaon VERSUS ^-'- Kedar Nath, S/o Devnarayan Nai, aged about 37 years, R/o Sector - 11, KLC Khursipar, Bhilai, PS Khursipar Bhilai, Tehsil & District - Durg (CG) (Driver of the vehicle) Smt Siromani Pandey, W/o Ramashankar Pandey, R/o Samta Colony Qtr No.487, Raipur, Tehsil & District Raipur (CG) (Owner of the vehicle) The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Through : its Divisional Manager, The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Parmanand Bhawan, near Dr Rajendra Park, GE Road, Durg, Tehsil & District - Durg (CG) (Insurerofthevehicle) MISC. APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 (2) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLESACT.1988. Present: Shri P.R. Patankar, counsel for the appellants. •^ ^.^xy ORDER (31stMarch,2011) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. Shri PR Patankar, learned counsel for the appellants is heard on admission. , 2) The appellants are seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the 8th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Durg (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 30.10.2010, passed in Claim Case No.99/2009. 3) As against the compensation of Rs.7,35,000/- claimed by the appellants/ claimants, unfortunate parents of deceased girl Ku. Kajal Verma, aged about six years, by filinga claimpetition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for her death in the motor accident on 03.05.2009, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.55,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per* annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 4) Shri P.R. Patankar, learned < counsel for the appellants vehemently argued that the Tribunal has erred in awardinglow compensation of Rs.55,000/- only though the appellants' daughter Ku. Kajal Verma was a brilliant student and had a bright future. 5) The Apex Court whilecpnsidering as to what would be the just and proper compensation for the death of a child aged about 1 ..•-^^•—, 7 years in the case of Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Syed Ibrahim and others, reported in 2007 (4) TAC-385 (SC) observed in paras 9 & 10 : "9. This Court in Lata Wadhwa while computing compensation made distinction between the deceased children falling within the age group of 5 to 10 years and age group of 10 to 15 years. 10. In cases of young children of tender age, in view of uncertainties abound, neith^r their income at the time of death nor the prospects of the future increase in their income nor chances of advancement of their career arecapable of proper determination on estimated basis. The reason is that at such an early age, the uncertaihties in regard to their academic pursuits, achievements incareer and thereafter advancement in life are so many that nothing can be assumed with reasonable certainty. Therefore, neither is the income of the deceased child capable of assessment on estimated basis nor is the financial loss suffered by the parents capable of mathematical computation." The Apex Court in the case of Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Syed Ibrahim and others (sup^a) held that the compensation of Rs.51,500/- was just and proper compensation for the death of a child aged about seven years. .6) The compensation of Rs.55,000/- awarded by the Tribunal when examined in the context of the above quoted dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Ortental Insurance Co. Ltd., (supra), and the fact that appellants' daughter Ku. Kajal Verma was aged* '^ w^' '..?p'..^l;. i ' .~^: ll^s»l^ ^ ^y ^' "^^1—-"'" ;'^ about six years only, we are satisfied, is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case and does not call for any enhancement in this appeal. 7) The appeal filed by the. appejlants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation, therefore, is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed summarily. Sd/- ChiefJustice Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge nimmi