HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV QUPTA, C.J. HON'BLE SHRI N.K. AGARWAL, J. Appellants Ciaimants Miscellaneous Appeal (0 Ho.407 of 2008 1 Smt Tijan Bai Thakur, W/o Late Khorbahra Ram ThaRur, aged about 52 years (wrongly mentioned as 32 years in the cause titie of the judgment), Caste - Hafba 2 Smt Tikeshwari Bai Thakur, S/o Late Parshuram Thakur, aged about 29 years, Caste - Halba 3 Gaurav Thakur, S/o Late Parshuram Thakur, aged about 04 years, (Minor), Caste Halba 4 Kamal Thakur, S/o Late Par^iuram ThaRur, aged about 02 years, (Minor). Caste Halba (Appellants No.3 & 4 being minor on behalf of through their iegal guardian mother appellant No.2 Smt Tikeshwari Bai Thakur) All R/o Village - Tikrapara, Daundi - Lohara, Tehsil - Daundi - Lohara. Potice station -- Daundi - Lohara, Distrcit Durg (CG) Respondents Non-Ctelmants VERSUS 1 Dashruram Yadav, S/o Asharam Yadav, aged about 34 years, R/o ViUage - Chandrakhuri, Police Station ~ Pulgaon, Tehsil & District - Durg )(CG) 2 Basir Ali Musalman S/o Sahdirt All Musalman, aged about 50 years, R/o Kelabadi, Durg, Distrtet Durg (CG) 3 The Oriental Insurance Company Limtted through Divisional Manager, Divisional Office, Durg, District - Durg (CG) Memorandum of Appeal under Section 173 ot the Motor Vehicle Act Present r Shri Shivendu Pandya, counsel for the appettants. Shri Jitendra Gupta, counsel for respondents No.1 & 2. Shri Abhishek Sinha and Shri GS Patel, counsel for respondent No.3. ORDER (8th September,2009) The following order of ftie Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, CJ. Appellants / daimants 'are seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Additional Motor AccidCTt Claims Tribunal, Balod, District Durg (for short, 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 20.12.2007 passed in Claim Case No.61/2007. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.16,25,000/-, claimed by the appellants / claimants, unfortunate widow, minor children and mother of deceased Parshuram by filing a claim petttion under Section 166 of the Motor Vehides Act for his death in the motor accident on 09.10.2006, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.2,41,000/- as compensation along with inter^t @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petltion till the date of actual payment. 3) Shri Shivendu Pandya, 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.2,000/- per month and Rs.24,000/- per annum; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.2,41,000/- only. 4) Shri Abhishek Sinha and Shri GS Patel, leamed counsel for respondent No.3 The Oriental Insurance Company Limited on the other hand supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.2,41,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and propercompensation In the facts and circumstances ofthe present case. 5) Shri Jitendra Gupta, learned counsel for respondents No.1 & 2 also supported the award. 6) The Tribunal on the evidence led by the parties held that deceased Parshuram died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 09.10.2006; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehide minibus; As the minibus on the date of the accident was insured with the Oriental Insurance Company Limited, the Insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the clalmants. 7) The claimants pleaded that deceased Parshuram i©edto earn Rs.3,000/- per month as conductor on the said mlnibus, and was also getting Rs.50/- per day as daily allowance. The claimants could not adduce any cogent and clinching evidence in regard to the income ofthe deceased as pleaded by them. We, therefore, do not find any fault in the approach of the Tribunal in disc^irding the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased. Nevertheless, the income of the deceased assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.2,000/- per month and Rs.24,000/- per annum Is certainly on the lower side.. The Tribunal whtle discarding the claimants' evttence about the income of the deceased ought to have assessed his income on the basis of the Notional Incorae J?^'.w-^, <^ ^. ^. %gfi g t / prescribed in the in the second schedule under Section163-A ofthe Motor Vehicles Act. 8) The Notional Income of Rs.15,000/- was prescribed jn the Second Schedule under Section163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act in the year 1994. The accident in the present case wherein deceased Parshuram lost his life took place in the year 2006. If the increase in the prices of essential commodities and the cost of living during the period between 1994 to 2006 is taken into ®>nsideration,the notional income of Rs.15,000/- prescribed in the Second Schedule in the year 1994 would certainly come to Rs.36,000/- in the year 2006. We, therefore, propose to recompute the eompensation taking the income ofthe deceased at Rs.36,000/- per annum. 9) By deducting 1/3rd of R$.36,000/- towards personal expenses of the deceased, the clalmants' dependency is assessed at Rs.24,000/- per annum. 10) By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.24,(X)0/- with the multiplier of 15, selected by the Tribunal, which in our opinion also is appropriate In the present case, the compensation works out to Rs.3,60,000/-. The claimants are further entitted 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.3,75,000/- as compensation for the d^ith of deceased Parshuram in the motor accident. 11) 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 irterest on the enhanced amount of compensation, the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation may be quantified in this appeal itself. 12) Considering all the relevant 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 payable on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.1,34,000/- at Rs.17,000/-. 13) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appeltants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in j^irt. The Compensation of Rs.2,41,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.3,75,000/- with further quantified amount of interest of Rs.17,000/- on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.1,34.000/-. 14) Respondent No.3 The Oriental Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the sum of Rs.1,51,000/- (Rupees one lakh flfty one thousand only) (Rs.1,34.000/- towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.17,000/- towards interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.1,34,000/-) before the concemed claims Tribunal. 15) No order as to costs. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- N. K. Agarwal judge padma