-4-.P.R, ^-3^- HIGH COURTOF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J. Misc^. Ap&ea! IQ\NQ.540 of 2010 ,^ Apoellants Respondents Smt. Chandra Jadhav, w/o late Suresh Jadhav, 38 years, Ku. Arti d/o late Suresh Jadhav, aged about 16 years, Ku. Bharti, d/o late Suresh Jadhav, agedabout 14 years, Ku. Ranu, d/o tate Suresh Jadhav, aged about 11 years, Appellant No. 2, 3 and 4 are minors through natural guardjan and mother appellant no.1 Smt. Chana Jadhav, All R/o Santoshi Ward near Babaramdev Mandir, Kumharpara, Jagdalpur, distt. Bastar C.G. VERSUS Rameshwar Kumar Panigrahi, s/o Pawan Panigrahi, 38 years, r/o behind Ramji Servicing, Ganga Munda Ward, Jagdalpur, distt. Bastar C.G. Smt. Ranju Ishwar, w/o Ramdas Ishwar, r/o Jai Gurudev Road, Naya Munda Ward, Jagdalpur, distt. Bastar C.G. The Oriental Ins. Co. Ltd., through its Branch Manager, Main Road, Jagdalpur, distt. Bastar C.G. Memo ofapBeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicte Act - ,aLBW~«T«SiSi^1 .»«<£~'<)i.\ ^ '%' 'A I 1 S, "S -9 M.A.C.No. 540 of 2010 !Q Present: Shri Keshav Dewangan, counsel for the appellants. Shri A.K. Athaley, counsel for respondent No.3. ORDER ith (04"'November,2011) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. This is claimants' a'ppeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bastar at Jagdalpur (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 13.01.2010, passed in Claim Case No.309/2007. 2) As against the compensationof Rs. 10,94,0007- claimed by the appellants/ claimants, unfortunate widow and minor daughters of deceased Suresh Jadhav, by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 23.10.2007, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.4,21,960/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum in the event of the insurer's failure to deposit the amount of compensation within two months ofthe passing ofthe award. 3) The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held that deceased Suresh Jadhav died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 23.10.2007; the accidentoccurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Truck bearing registration No.C.G.- 04J/2185; as the above offending vehicle Truck on the date of the accident was insured with the Oriental Insurance Company f '">.? M.A.C.No. 540 of 2010 Limited and the Insurance Company could not establish any breach ofthe policy conditions, the Insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimants. 4) As the respondents have not filed any appeal challenging the above findings recorded by the Tribunal, the same now have attained finality. 5) The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.4,000/- per month. By deducting 1/3rd of Rs.4,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.2,660/- per month and Rs.31,920/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.31,920/- with the multiplier of 13, the compensation was worked out to Rs.4,14,960/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.7,000/- under other heads, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.4,21,960/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Suresh Jadhav in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.4,21,960/- @ 6%per annum in the event of insurer's failure to deposit the amount of compensation within two months ofthe passing ofthe award. 6) Shri Keshav Dewangan, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the claimants' overwhelming evidence about the income of the deceased and in assessing his income at Rs.4,000/- per month only; in selecting the lower multiplier of 13; in awarding only Rs.7,000/- under other heads; in awarding only Rs.4,21,960/- as IK; ^°^?¥^^^SSs^ M.A.C.No. 540 of 2010 9- compensation; and in directing only conditional payment of interest in the event of the insurer's failure to deposit the amount of compensation within two months ofthe passing ofthe award. 7) Shri A.K. Athaley, learned counsel for respondent No.3, the Oriental Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Truck, on the other hand supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.4,21,960/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances ofthe present case. 8) Deceased Suresh Jadhav was aged about 45 years on the date of the accident. He was a driver by occupation and used to drive a ten-wheel truck. The claimants in their claim petition categorically pleaded that deceased Suresh Jadhav used to get Rs.4,500/- per month as salary from the owner of the Truck. Respondent No.2 Smt. Ranju Ishwar, owner of the Truck in her written statement filed before the Tribunal admitted that a sum of Rs.4,500/- per month was being paid as salary to deceased Suresh Jadhav. Before the Tribunal, the claimant examined AW2 R^jesh Kumar, a co-driver of the deceased also in the employment of respondent No.2 Smt. Ranju Ishwar and he too categorically stated that deceased Suresh Jadhav was getting Rs.4,500/- per month as salary. Nothing material could be elicited by the respondents in his cross examination. In fact, NAW1 Ramdas Ishwar, husband of respondent No.2 Smt. Ranju Ishwar, owner of the Truck and employer of deceased Suresh Jadhav t.-,: .Sf".7:'.^~:.,.'. -,£ .A.C.No. 540 of 2010 also stated in his deposition before the Tribunal that deceased Suresh Jadhav was getting Rs.4,500/- per month as salary. 9) In our considered opinion, the Tribunal has erred in ignoring the above mentioned overwhelming eyidence of the claimants above the income of the deceased and in assessing his income at Rs.4,000/- per month only. The Tribunal, in our opinion, ought to have assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.4,500/- per month and Rs.54,000/- per annum. We, therefore; propose to recompute the compensation taking the income of the deceased at Rs.4,500/- per month and Rs.54,000/- per annum. 10) By deducting the usual 1/3rt of Rs.54,000/- towards the personal expenses ofthe deceased, the claimants' dependency is assessed at Rs.36,000/- per annum. 11) The multiplier of 13 selected by the Tribunal is also on the lower side in view of the 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 14 has been prescribed for the age group between 41-45 years. In our opinion, multiplier of 14, therefore, would be appropriate in the present case. 12) By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.36,000/- with the multiplier of 14, the compensation works out to Rs.5,04,000/-. The claimants are further entitled to receive Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses; Rs.5,000/- for loss of estate; and Rs.5,000/- for loss of cohsortium to the widow. The claimants, thus, become entitled to receive a total sum of 'L. M.A.C.No. 540 of 2010 H w Rs.5,19,000/- as compensation for the death of deceased Suresh Jadhav in the motor accident. 13) Learned counsel for the parties submitted that with a view to avoid any possible dispute between the parties before the Tribunal about the period for which the claimants are entitled to receive interest on the enhanced amount of compensation, the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation may be quantified in this appeal itself. 14) Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, including the delay in disposal of the claim petition, and the present appeal; the fact that the Insurance Company alone is not to be blamed for the entire delay in the matter; the fact that the Tribunal by directing only conditional payment of interest in the event of the insurer's failure to deposit the amount of compensation within two months of the passing of the award has deprived the claimants of the amount of interest to which they were otherwise entitled; further the fact that the insurance company in fact deposited the amount of compensation before the Tribunal on 22.02.2010 i.e. within two months of the passing of the award and as such did not pay even a single rupee towards interest on the awarded amount, we quantify the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation and the amount awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.22,960/-. 15) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs.4,21,960/- awarded by "z..---. •^•."* 2^ I.A.C.No. 540 of 2010 the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.5,19,000/- with further quantified amount of interest of Rs.22,960/-. 16) Respondent No.3 the Oriental Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.1,20,000/- (rupees one lakh twenty thousand only) (Rs.97.040/- towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.22,960/- towards quantified amount of interest) before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 17) No order as to costs. Sd/- Ghief Justice Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge subbu