HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAIVI: HON’BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, CJ. HON’BLE SHRI PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, J. Misc. Appeal No. 174 of 2002 #wN Appellants 1 Smt Budhwara Bai aged about 38 yrs., (Claimants) widow of Late Ramfal Patel Feku Ram Patel, aged about 14 yrs Kumari Rajnl Patel, aged about 12 yrs Ku. Shani Bai aged about 10 years OI 6 Nohar Patel, aged about 4 yrs. All are sons and daughters of Late Ramfal Patel Appellant No.2 to 6 represented by appellant No.1 being natural guardian of minor appellants. ' 7 Smt Chandrawaii, aged about 60 yrs, wife of Ramji Patel All residents of village Nirtu, Post Ghutku, Tah. Takhatpur, Distt Bilaspur MP Ku.Samaytin aged about 7 yrs VERSUS 5 yrs. Son of Bachhan Singh Thakur (Bus Driver) resident of near Khandoba Mandir, Ratanpur, Distt. Bilaspur, M.P. Krishna Kumar Patel, son of ltwari Ram Patel (Bus owner) resident of viliage and post Amora, Distt. Bilaspur. Branch Manager, New indie insurance Company Limited, Through Branch Manager, Br.Office Respondents Mahabir alias Raju, aged about 3 Non-appticants Rajendra Nagar Chowk, Bilaspur. Distt. Bilaspur Appeal Under Section 173 of lthe Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Present: Shri Malay Kumar Bhaduri, counsel for the appellants. None for respondents No.1 and 2 though served. Shri Deepak Gupta, counsel for respondent No.3. ORDER (15m April, 2010) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. This is ciaimants’ appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by Fifth Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur (for short ‘the Tribunal’) vide award dated 05.10.2001, passed in Ciaim Case No.93/2001. 2. As against the compensation of Rs.10,30,000/— claimed by the appellants/ claimants, unfortunate widow, minor children and parents of deceased Ramfal Patel, by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act for his death in the motor accident on 23.07.2000, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.2,09,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of tiling of the claim petition till’the date of actual payment. 3. The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held that, deceased Ramfal Patel died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 23.07.2000; tire accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle bus bearing registration No.MP26- s «av C/5668; as the offending vehic!e bus on‘the date of the accident was insured with New India Insurance Company Limited, the insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimants. 4. As the respondents have not filed any appeal against the award, the above findings recorded by the Tribunal have now attained finality. 5. The Tribunal asseSsed the income of the deceased at Rs.1,500/— per month. By deducting 1/3“ of Rs.1,500/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants’ dependency was assessed at Rs.10,000/— per month and Rs.12,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.12,000/- with the multiplier of 16, the compensation was worked out to Rs.1,92,000l—. By awarding further sum of Rs.17,000/- under other heads, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.2,09,000!— as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Ramfal Patel in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.2,09,000/— @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6. Shri Malay Kumar Bhaduri, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the claimants’ evidence about the income of the deceased and in assessing his income at Rs.1,500!- per month only; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.2,09,000/— only. 7. Shri Deepak Gupta, learned counsel for respondent No.3 New India lnsurance Company Limited, on the other hand, supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.2,09,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present Case. 8. in a motor accident claim case what is important is that the compensation to be awarded by the Courts/Tribunal should be just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the case. lt should neither be a meager amount of compensation nor a bonanza. 9. Now, we shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.2,09,000!- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 10. True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Ramfal Patel used to earn Rs.150/- per day and Rs.4,500/- per month as Mason, but the evidence led in that behalf was not of clinching nature. in this state of evidence, we do not find any fault in the approach of the Tribunal in discarding the claimants’ evidence about the income of the deceased. 11. Nevertheless, the income of the deceased assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.1,500/- per month is certainly on the lower side and requires reconsideration. 12. Deceased Ramfal Patel was aged about 40 years on the date of the accident. The unfortunate accident wherein deceased Ramfal Patel lost his life took place in the year 2000; 'ln our s considered opinion, deceased Ramfa! Patel could have easily earned Rs.2,000/- per month even by working as an un-skilled iabour. We, therefore, propose to re-compute the compensation taking the income of the deceased at Rs.2,000/— per month and Rs.24,000l— per annum. 13. By deducting the usual 1/3“ of Rs.24,000/— towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants’ dependency is assessed at Rs.1 6,0001- per annum. 14. Considering that deceased Ramfal Patel was aged about 40 years on the date of the accident, appropriate multiplier in the present case would be 15 in View of therecent dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt) and Others Versus Delhi Transport Corporation and another, reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121, wherein multiplier of 15 was prescribed for the age group between 36-40 years. 15. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.16,000/- with the multiplier of 15 the compensation works out to Rs.2,40,000/-. The claimants are further entitled to receive Rs.5,000/— towards funeral expenses; Rs.5,000/— for loss of consortium to the widow; and Rs.5,000/— for loss of estate. The claimants, thus, become entitled to receive a total sum of Rs.2,55,000/— as compensation for the death of deceased Ramfal Patel in the motor accident. 16. Learned counsel for the parties submitted that with a view to avoid any possible dispute between the parties about the ~ period for which the claimants are entitled to receive interest on the enhanced amount of compensation, the amount of interest on s the enhanced amount of compensation may be quantified in this appeal itself. 17. Considering all the reievant factors including the delay in disposal of the claim petition and the present appeal and the fact that the Insurance Company alone is not to be blamed for the entire delay in the matter, we quantify the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.46,000/- at Rs.5,000/—. 18. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs.2,09,000/— awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.2,55,000/- with further quantified amount of interest of Rs.5,000/- on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.46,000f-. 19. Respondent No.3 New lndia insurance Company Limited is granted three months’ time for depositing the total sum of Rs.51,000/- (Rs.46,000/— towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.5,000/- towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.46,000/—) before the concerning Claims Tribunal. subbu l i i 20. No order as to costs. Sd/- l Sdl- Prashant Kumar Mishra t Chief Justice Judge gt /"