N THE HIGH CO A A ‘ Chhttgh ‘ 1 Cammandant alsar Arm¢d olve lal attallon, Headquarters B Dlstrlc ur hhttisarh Pl, Bhl I hllal, Durg, t Bg, Cagw .state of Chhattisgar hrouh Collector, srict ufC. Dit Dg;G. ‘VES RSU k St abt 25 Bai;h s, V“ L6“ ” ‘" m ou Prabha' year Ku.Trivenl Bal,- *abaut 10 years, D/Q Late Ganesh Ku Preey, e 8 % Veara D/o Late Gane sh ageswar,~ ‘52 ye ars‘,‘ /oaLatrGanesh Ra Omml e abOu 6 years S/ Le Gaeh Rm o at ns a (1 o 5 are rSlen lwara, lst Burg ghattlegarh§ aan Slngh Kalyam Slng Sident of 11th. Battallo n C”Cempanyg B llal, lstrlct ~ D r N APLICNT PA NO 3 I URT OF JUDICTURE AT BILSPUR CHHATTISGARH w h tg t Agd , ‘DhAge 7Dé m t Agd t t edt Ah D , c . Md egl h ” \ “ D g i Ke .. MK R¢Z$7,crw75‘ CATIDN UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MDTOR VEHICLE, ' <~ 1988 APPLI IQCT \ » HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH BILASPUR ‘ DB: HON’BLE LM. QUDDUSI & HON’BE N.K. AGARWAL, JJ APPELLANTS 1 Commandant, Chhatiisgarh Arm€d Police, B-I Battalion, Head— quarters, Durg, District Dirg, hhattisgarh. C 2 State of Chhattiagarh throu Collector District Dur C.G. Vs. APPEARANCE: Mr. G. D. Waswani, Govt. Advocate, for the appellants. Mr. Manoj Jaiswal, counsel for respondents 1 to 5. we“, -\ ORDER (ORAL) (27.10.2010) Per LM. QUDDUSI, J 01. .Tbjs appeal has been Eed against the impugned award dated 03.10.2002 passed by the VI Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Durg in Claim Case No.47/2000 whereby the Claimantslrespondent nos.1 to 5 have been awarded compensation of Rs.'Z,37,000l- with interest @ 9% L MAM No. 111 012003 hilai Bhilai, gh , g () RESPONDENTS 1. Smt. Pmbha Bai, aged about 25 years, W/o Late Ganesh Ram 2. Ku, ’I‘Iiveni Bai, aged about 10 years, D/o Late Ganesh Ram, 3. K11. Preety, aged about 8 V2 yeam, D/o Late Ganesh Ram 4. Dageshwar, aged about 7 ‘/2 yem, D/o Late Ganesh Ram 5. Ommit, aged about 6 years, a/o late Gancsh Ram 6. Madan Singh Negi, s/o Kalyam Siugh, resident of 11th Batallion, “C” Company, Bhilai, Distt. Durg (C.G). per annnm Mm the date of claim application h'll the date of reah'mtion. 02. Brief facts of 'the case as per version of the claimants ale that the deceased was working as constable in State Armed Force (SAF) of 11th Battalion and was drawing a monthly salaxy of Rs.8500/-, Respondent no.1 is Widow and respondents 2 to 5 are minor children of the deceased. It is alleged that on 04.05.2000 at about 14.30 hours deceased Ganesh Ram was going to Bijapur by Government Vehicle bearing Regn. No. M.P.P. 3824 and due to rash and negligent driving of its driver that is respondent no.1, the said vehicle has turned turtle at Mingachal River near Bhairamgarh, as a result of which Ganesh Ram sustained serious injuries and he died. He was aged about 37 years at the time of accident. The claimants made claim to the tune of Rs.23,70,000/ - on diderent heads by dljng claim pen'tion. 03. Shri G.D. Waswani, learned Govt. Advocate appearing for the appellants submits that the multiplier adopted by the Tribunal is on higher side and therefore the compensation granted by the Tribunal is excessive. 04. The learned Tribunal has held that Ganesh Ram has died on account of the injuries caused in the accident met with by Vehicle bearing Regn.No.M.P.P.3824 which was being rashly and negligently being driven by its driver and the deceased was earning Rs.6000/— per month on the post of constable. After deducting 1/3“! of the income, the dependency of the claimants was hxed as Rs.4000/- i'per month and Rs.48.000/ - per annum. Looking to the age of deceased that s A ‘xW However, at this stage, learned Government Advocate pleads that the Tribunal has granted interest @ 9% per annnm which is on higher side. Since the rate of interest in our opinion also seems to be higher, it would be appropriate to - reduce the same to 6%. Therefore we modiiy the award to the extent that the interest is reduced from 9% to 6%). The claimants would be entitled to get interest @ 6% per annnm from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of realization, The appeal is allowed in part to the above extent. 7’- sup ¢§,Z ,¢\ i.M.Qudd“s‘. we \ ,\ \ \ is 37 years at the time of accident, tha Tribunal as applied the multiplier of 15 which cannot be said to be incorrect and the total dependency was worked out as Rs.7,20,000/—. Besides this, the Tribunal has gianted Rs.2000/- for funeral expenses and Rs.15,000/~ for loss of consortium towards widow and minor children of the deceased. Thus the Tribunal has awaxded a total compensation of Rs.7,37,000/ ~ which in our opinion is not excessive. Therefote, we are not inclined to interfele with the award of the Tribunal. war¢=h y— it\ \\ .i . \ Judge i