HIGH CGURT 0? CHHATTISG RH £T E§EJRSPUR ESV!SION BENCH CORAM: HON’BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA. C.J. HON’BLE $HRERANGNATE CHANBRAKARJ Misc Appeai No.66 cf 236$ Anneiiants Smt Guiabia Bai Wfo Late Nathu Lai, Ckaimants aged about 35 yeai's Manoj @ Chergu S/o Late Nathu La}, a... agEua Agbeu; u I. an luy€dla . Av» 3 $onad‘nan S/‘a Late Nathu Lal, aged au’u‘Ln. in a u 0 u yEma a». Mukesh, S/o Late Nathu Lai, aged abau 2years 5 Naresh, Sic Late Nathu Lal, aged about 5 months Appellants 2 i0 5 through Mother and Natura! Guamlian, ameNant Na“. Smt Guiabia Baé Ali R/o Choudighat: Chitrakut, PS Lohandiguéa, B§st Bastar (CG) VERSUS 1 t Resnondents Viiava (é), Jai Sanr‘aa Pradhan S/o Late u ‘2 \Non appnuame, Béehwa'F’radhan, R/o Raieuiiam, Past ; g I A Ho é \ Saiiada, Disti Ganpati Grissa at present > Kasibugga (nr A n\ ) Mfg Balaji Engineering 8: Contractor, Cempany “av uncugu n la P f‘ Vhurainan, i‘ Dear No.55-14—103, Sitammadh‘ara, Viahakaisarnam (A?) The New India msurance Company Ltd, Near Jhanmr In. f‘: mnema, Jagualpur, l A DistBastar RH mmul wank“: Hm A Present . Shn Prafuil Bharat and Shn bantosn Bnarat counse. wr the aweHanta None for respondent \io 1 and 2 thoudh served o In An r-unamy, nth uuu'maei w! AAAAAAAAAA Icayuuuem hNu a GRgER {b h Allnu¢t bu .g} The foiiowing order of the Court was passed by Raieev Gums. 6“}. This ' is claimants‘. apnea} for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the $econd Additionai Motor Accident 'Ciaims Tribunal, Jagdaipur (for short ‘the Tribunai") vide award dated 221 1 .2GC3. oassed in Ciaim Case Nod/2063 2} As against the compensation of 11,1QOOSI- ciaimed by the appeiiants/ciaimants, unfortunate widow and minor children of deceased Nathu Lai bv fiiinc a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicies Act. for his death in the motor accident on 27.09.2062. the Tribunai, awarded a totat sum of Rsi ,63.0C)0/- as compensation aiono With interest (a) 9% oer annum from the date of the filing of the ciaim petition t'iii the date of actuai payment. 3) The Tribunal on a close sorutinv of the entire evidence led before it held that deceased Nathu Lai died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 27‘092002; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicie Truck bearing registration No.MP-31Wi404t; as the offending vehicle Truck on the date of the accident was insured with the New India insurance Company Limited, the insurance Company was iiabie to pay compensation to the ciaimants. 4) As the respondents have not fiied any appeal againsi the award, the above findings recorded by the Tribunai have now attained finality. 5) I The Tribunai assessed the income of the deceased at Rsi ,SGGI— per month and Rs.18,fJGD/— per annum. By deducting 113'“ of Rs.18,090l— towards the persona! expenses of the deceased, the ciaimants’ dependency was assessed at Rst ZGGGf- per annum. By muitipiying the annuai dependency of Rs.12,000/- with the muitipiier of 13, the compensation was worked out to Rsi 56,000 /-. By awarding further sum of Rs.7,GDO/— under other heads, the Tribunai awarded a totai sum of Rs.i,63.GGO/— as compensation to the ciaimants for the death of deceased Nathu Lai in the motor accident. The Tribunai further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.’i.63.0DG/- @ 9% per annum from the date of the fiiing of the ciaim petition tiii the date of actuai payment. 6) Shri Prafuii Bharat and Shri Santosh Bharat, iearned counsei for the appellants submitted that the Tribunai has erred in not accepting the ciaimants‘ evidence about the income of the deceased and in assessing his income at Rsi ,BQDE- per month and Rs.18,060l— per annum only; in selecting the lower multiplier of 13; and in awarding iow compensation of Rsi ,63,0DGI~ only. 7)' Shri AK Athaiey, learned counsei for respondent No.3 the New lndia lnsUrance Company Limited, on the other hand supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.1,63,000I-, awarded by the Tribunai is juet and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 8) in a motor accident ciaim case what is important is that the compensation to be awarded by the Courts i Tribunais shouid be gust and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the case. it shouid neither be a meager amount of compensation, nor a bonanza. Q) Now, we shaii examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.i,63,600[- awarded by the Tribunai is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 1(3) True, the ciaimants pleaded that deceased Nathu Lai, who was aged about 45 years used to earn RSSQOGJ— per month as Carpenter, the evidence ied in that behaif was not of clinching nature. We, therefore, do not find any fautt in the approach of the Tribunal in discarding the claimants’ evidence about the income of the deceased. 11) Neverthelessthe income of the deceased assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.1,500/- per month and Rs.18,0UO/— per annum is certainly on the lower side and requires reconsideration. -12) Considering that deceased Nathu Lat was aged about 45 years, in our opinion he could have easily earned Rs.70/— per day even by working as an un-skiiied labour. We, therefore, propose to _/MW ’ g? re—compute the compensation taking the income of the deceased at RSZGDOJ- per month and Rs.24:GGO/'- per annum. 13) By deducting the usua! 1/3“ of Rs.24,Q00l— towards the personai expenses of {he deceased, the ciaimant§ dependency is assessed at Rs.’i 6,00% per annum. 143 Considering that: deceased Nathu Lai was aged about 45 years, muitipiier of 14 wouid be appropriate in the present case in View of the recent dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt) and others Versus beihi Transport Corporation and another reported in (2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases 121, wherein muitipiier of 14 has been prescribed for the age group between 41 -45 years. 1’5) By multiplying the annual dependency of Rsi 6,GOG/- with the muitipiier of 14, the compensation works out to Rs.2,24,0GOI-. The ciaimants are further entitled to receive RSECUGI- towards funerai expenses. RSSDOCI- for ioss of estate and Rs.5,CfJO/— for ioss of consortium to the widow. The claimants, thus, become entitled to receive a totai sum of Rs.2,39,GGDI- as compensation for the death of deceased Nathu Lai in the motor accident. 16) The claimants are further awarded a iump—sum of Rs.5,00D/- towards ou'antified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.76,CiCOf—. 1.7) For the foregoing reasons, the appaai fiied by the appeiiantsl'ciaimants for enhancement of the compensation is aiiowed in part. The compensation of Rs.1,63,000l— awarded by the Tribunai is enhanced to Rs.2,39,00€)1— with further quantified «ha; amount' of interest of Rs.S,GGO/- on the enhanced amount of ;\ compensation of Rs.76,€)OO/-. 5 ‘4 18) Resoondent No.3 the New lndia Insurance Company Limited it is oranted three months; time for depositing Rs.81,GOG/— (Rs.76,000i- towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.5,GOG/— towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.76,000/—) before the concerning Ciaims Tribunal. 19) No order asto costs. ""\ sw- i \~, i ER.N.Chandrakar Sd/— , U ; "' Judge ‘2 Chief Justice iri i. ri‘r i7 Vi padma