"^ .^-s^ /K^ fcS5iS%-. % ^^% f. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH ^ CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON»BLE SHRi RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J. Appellants CIaimants Respondents Non-ciaimants Misc. Appeal (C) No. 116 of 2009 1. Smt. Purinbai Nishad wd/o late Hirderam Nishad, aged about 43 years, 2. Uday Ram Nishad s/o late Hirderam Nishad, aged about 20 years, 3. Ku. Maheshwari Nishad d/o late Hirderam Nishad, aged about 17 years, Appellant No.3 through natural guardian of her mother Smt. Purinbai Nishad All are residents of villag egodbahaj, post office Gadbeda, thana Pjthoura, Tahsil and district Mahasamund C..G VERSUS 1. Mohammad Jahangir s/o Aas Mohammad, aged 39 years, occupation driver, r/o 98 Mariyam Mahal, Sadar Bazar, Bairakpur, Thana Bairakpur, thana Bajrakpur, district 24, Pargana North. Kolkata 120(WestBengal) 2. Priyesh Barnwal s/o Pramod Barnwal, -—years, r/o 134/2 Nayapoli, Kajipada, Post Office Bairakpur, thana Bajrakpur, district 24, Parganan North, Kolkata 120, (WestBengal) 3. Branch Manager, The New India Insurance Co. Limited, Madina Buildjng, JaSI Road, Raipur, district Rajpur C.G. .2 o Misc. Appeal under Section 173 ofthe Motor Vehicle Act. !^ -rTit^m.,,,^.^- '.! 'l. Present: Shri Awadh Tripathi and Shri Abhishek Sharaf, counsel for the appellants. Shri Raj Awasthi, counsel for respondent No.3. ORDER (15mJuly,2011) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. The unfortunate widow and children of deceased Hirderam Nishad are the appellants before us in this appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mahasamund (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 01.11.2008, passed in CJaim Case No.78/2008. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.12,82,000/- claimed by the appellants/ daimants, unfortunate widow and children of deceased Hirderam Nishad, by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accjdent on 29.03.2008, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.4,36,000/- as compensation along with jnterest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 3) The Tribunal bn a close scrutjny of the entire evidence led before it held the New India Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Truck bearing registration No.W.B.23/A-9866 liable to pay compensation to the claimants. .^^^it ti III 4) As the insurer of the offending vehicle Truck has not filed any appeal challenging the above finding recorded by the Tribunal, the same now has attained finality. 5) The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.150/- per day and Rs.4.500/- per month. By deducting 1/3rd of Rs.4,500/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.3,000/- per month and Rs.36,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.36,000/- wjth the mujtiplier of 12, the compensation was worked out to Rs.4,32,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.2,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.2,000/- for loss consortium to the widow, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.4,36,000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Hirderam Nishad in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.4,36,000/- @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri Awadh Tripathi and Shri Abhishek Sharaf, learned counsel for the appeilants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in awarding low sum of Rs.4,000/- only under other heads; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.4,36,000/- only. 7) Shri Raj Awasthi, learned counsel for respondent No.3 the New India Insurance Company Limited. the insurer of the offending vehtele Truck, on the other hand, supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.4,36,000/- awarded ^^^^.^^^w^.^.^^^- by the Tribunal is justand proper compensation in the facts and circumstances ofthe present case. 8) In a motor accident ciaim case, what is important is that, the compensation to be awarded by the Courts/Tribunals should be just and proper compensation in the facts and Gircumstances of the case. It should neither be a meager amount of compensation, nor a Bonanza. 9) Now we shatl examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.4,36,000/- awarded by the Tribunal Is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances ofthe present case. 10) On due consideration of the submissions of learned counset for the parties and the evklence led by the claimants about the income of the deceased, we are satisfied that the Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.150/- per day; and Rs.4,500/- per month and the claimants' dependency at Rs.3,000/- per month and Rs.36,000/- per annum. 11) Considering the fact that deceased Hirderam Nishad was working as Carpenter in a small village Godbahal in the district of Mahasamund, we are satisfied that the compensation of Rs.4,32,000/- assessed by the Tribunal towards loss of dependency does not suffer from any infirmity. 12) Nevertheless, the Tribunal certainly has erred in not awarding any sum towards loss of estate and in awarding low sum of Rs.2,000/- each towards funeral expenses and Joss of consortium to the widow. ^^?4^mis^^t<%^.^?^^^*^%^^^ \ 13) Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, we are of the opinion that further award of Rs.15,000/- indusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation would make the compensation of Rs.4,36,000/- awarded by the Tribunal as just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 14) The appeal filed by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation, therefore, is allowed in part. The claimants are awarded further sum of Rs.15,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation in addition to the sum of Rs.4,36,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. 15) Respondent No.3 the New India Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.15,000/- before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 16) No order as to costs. —— Sd/- ChiefJustice subbu Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge ^^.^%..^^:.^S^i^KS^ii&f3!&^