IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MiSC. APPEAL (0 N0. i lLi 3 / 201 O Ojvision Bench ABPELLANT INSUBE'R/RESPONDENT N0. 3 ^^ ^ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd., through its Legal Manager, ICICI General Insurance Co. Ltd. Lal Ganga Shopping Complex, G.E. Road, .r..>-^"cA^^"' ' Ra'Pui". Chhattisgarh •-:;:^-^^w"" ^••"^^ ^•^ :\^ VERSUS R&SPONDENTS XCLAIMANTS Achchhe Ram, son of Late Shri Thandaram Sande, aged about 45 v years i. Smt. Kewara Bai, wife of Shri Achchhe Ram Sande, aged about 44 years ^3. Ku. Surita, daughter of Shri Achchhe Ram Sande, aged about 17 years 4. Kumari Savita, daughter of Shri Achchhe Ram Sande, aged about 13 years Respondent No. 3 and 4 being minors through their natural guardian being father Shri Achchhe Ram Resident of Chueeha (Ranigarh), Post Office Suti Urkuri, Thana Bhilaigarh, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh ^T$?OAJ A)T ^ID. 1 ^ Bhukhanlal, son of Shri Ghasiyaram Sahu, age not known to the appellant, resident of Koma, Thana Rajim, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, \ / ,.iiS?D^b^ltr ^. 2L 6. Bansilal, son of Shri Ramchand ^' Yadav, age not known to the appellant, resident of Jagrity Chowk, Bagdehipara, Nayapara (Gobraa), Post Office & Thana Nayapara (Gobraa), District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, MEMORANDUM OFAPPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOE VEHICLESACT1988 .^<. ADpeal valued at Rs. 4,85,944/- (Four Lakhs Eicihty Five Thousand Nine Hundred and Forty Four Onlvl Amnto Das,^ HSGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. CORAM: Hon'fote Shri I.M. Quddusl, J. & Hon'ble Shri Prashant Kumar Mishra^ Je ?jA(C^No.1148of2010 APPELLANT ICICI Lombard General insurance Co. Ltd. Versus • Achchhe Ram and others. 1T3 OF THE A.CT. 1988 Appearance: Shri Amrito Das, counso! for tho appoiSant. (20/01^011) FoJfowing oral order of the Court was passed by I. M. J. This appea! has been filed agalnst the impugned award dated 16/08/2010 of the Chlef Motor Accident Ciaims Tribunal, Raipur (C.G.) in CIaim Case No. 127/2009 in respect of quantum only by the Appeilant / insurance Company. 2. The brief facts of the case are that on 12/06/2009 at about 06.45 p.m. deceased Subhas Sande along with Rohit Banjare was going in motorcycle bearing regjstration No. C G.04DF/1583. Near Sadani Darb-ar, minibus bearing registration No.C.G.04/E/0150 being driven rashly and negljgentiy by non-appijcant No.1 dashed the motorcycie due to ¥/hi'ch Subhas Sande received grievous injuries and he died. Deceased was about 22 years and was worklng as Mason. He was earning Rs.4,500/- per mc?nth. The claimarits have clalmed compensation of Rs.10,72,000/-. 3. Though the income of the deceased was alleged as Rs.6,000/- per month but the Tribunal has assessed his Income as Rs.3,500/- per month. The annual income comes to Rs.42,000/-, however since the deceased was bachelor 50% js ilable to be deducted for his persona! living expenses, therefore the annual loss of dependency wou!d be Rs.21,000/-. The average age of the parents wouid be less than 45 years, therefore a -^- muftipiier of 14 would be appiicabte which comes to Rs.2,94,000/- i.e. tota! loss of dependency. Besides this the daimants are entitled to get Rs.5,000/- each for loss of iove and affection, Rs. 10,000/- for Soss of estate and Rs.5,000/- for funera! expenses. Therefore after addltion of Rs.35,000/- towards other heads the total compensation comes to Rs.3.29,000/-, therefore the ciaimants shall be entitied to get Rs.3,29,000/- as compensation along with 6% simple interest from the date of filing of the claim petition tiil the payment ofthe amount of award is made. 4. The amount sha!! be dssbursed in terms of the award with the modjfjcation that the deposits in the name of claimants No. 3 & 4 would be Rs. 5.000/- each as directed by the Tribunat, but the deposits jn the name of the parents wou!d be onjy to the extent of Rs. 3,00,000/- instead of Rs. 4,60,000/- and the remaining amount of the award would be paid in cheque to the parents. 5. Learned counsei for the appeSiant has submitted that the award amount has already been deposited. The claims Tribunal sha!) calculate the interest accrued on the amourit of the award fixed by this Court and the remaining amount shatl be refunded to the Jnsurance Company. 6. The appea! is allowed in part to the above extent. ^^__ Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd//- Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge y^,