HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR * DIVISION BENCH CORANI: HON BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA C J & HON BLE SHRI RANGNAETH CHANDRAKAR, J. s I Misc. Appeal (C) N'o. 1528 of 2006 Applicants laints ‘1. Smt Nadagi Dhurva, Wd/o Late Natsingh 13$ years Dhansingh Dhurva; 19 years Sampat DhUrva, 12 ears ’ y Astu Dhurva, 1O years Jalan Dhurva, 9 years Appeuant No.2 to 5 8/0 Late Narsing’h Appeliant No.3 to 5 Minor through : Mother and Natufa- Guardian Smt Nadgi Dhurva All Rio Vill Patelpara, Todapal, Post ~ Baderma PS Parpa, Dit Bastar VERSUS Respondents Abdul Samim @r Sajid Khan, S/o (Non-applicants Abdul Rashid 38 years, R/o Old Geedam Naka, Bahadurguda, Rajendra Nagar Ward, Jagdalpur The Oriental Insurance Company, Through Branch Manager, Jagdalpu (CG) MISC APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 r ' age...“ ' \ Present: Shri Santosh Bharat, cOunsel for the appellants. None for respondent No.1 though served; Tm 4r Shri Raj Awasthi, counsel for respondent No.2. Cma l mu st ) r ORDER (15m February, 2011) ‘ The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. This is claimants' appeal fqr enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Fourth ’Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bastar at Jagdalpur (fpr short ‘the Trlbgnal’) vide faward dated 23.06.2006, passed in Cla‘im Case No.83i2005. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.1 1 ,15,000/— claimed by the appellants/ claimants, unfortunate widow and children of deceased Narsingh Dhurva, by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death on 14.07.2005 on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 11.07.2005, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.2,77,500/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of tiling of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 3) The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held that deceased Narsingh Dhurva died on 14.07.2005 on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 11.07.2005; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Jeep bearing registration No.C.G.1.7—ZT/1146; as the above offending vehicle Jeep, on the date of the accident was insured with the Oriental insurance Company Limited and the insurance Company could v. MEMKaE WW i not establish any breach of the,policy conditions, the Insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the ciaimants. 4) As the respondents have not filed any appeal against the award, the above findings recorded by the Tribunal have now attained finality. 5) ’The Tribunal assessed the incjome of the deceased at Rs.3,000/— per month. By deducting ’lf3'd Of Rs.3!000l- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the olaimants' dependency was assessed at wRsl‘2,000/- pet. 'month and/ Rs.24,000/— per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.24,0001— with the multiplier of 11 the compensation was worked out to *Rs.2,64,0f)O/—. ,By awarding further sum of Rs.13,500/- under other heade, the Tribunal awarded a total sum ‘ of Rs.2,7?,500/— as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Narsingh Dhurva in the motor accident. The, Tribunal further directedpayment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.2.,77,500/- @ 6% perannum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri Santosh Bharat, learned counsel for the appeltant vehemently argued that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the claimants? evidence about the income of the deceased and in _ assessing his income atrRs.3,000l- per month only; in selecting the‘lower multiplier of 11; and in awardinglow compensation of Rs.2,77,5001— only. ' er s ) Vhri‘Raj Awasthi, learned couns\el fdr respondeht No.2 the ‘Oriental insurance Company Limited orithe other hand supported V the award and contended that as Ifthe deceased was an agriculturist and his agricultural land can still be cultivated by the ' ciaimants either themselves or with! the heip of Iabour, the , l _ compensation of Rs.2,77,500/— awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in thefaotsiand circumstancesof the / v 1 . . , u 1 case. K 8) True the claimants pleaded that deceased Narsmgh Dhurva used to earn Rs 5 OOOI- per rnonth from agriculture the eVIdence led In that behalf was highly dlscrepant, Inasmuch as AW1 Nadagi Dhurva, the widow, of the deceased stated that the deceased'us‘ed to earn Rs.1Q;000-12,QOO/- per month, whereas the claimants‘ other witness AW3 Dharmu stated that the. / deceased used to earn Rs 6 000-7 DOO/- per month In this state of ewdence we do not fund any fault In the approach of the ' ribunal ln discarding the claimants’ evidence about the income of the deceased and in assessing his income on its own estimate t Rs.3,ooo/— per month. ' 9) The. olalmants’ dependency also has been rightly assessed by the Tribunal by deducting the‘usual 1/3” of the income of the deceased towards his pe‘rsonal expenses. V 10) Nevertheless, the multiplier of 11 selected by the'Tribynal. is certainly on the lower side. r I _ ‘R. E (mm 7 S a T 11-) Considering the age of ihe decesed, his widow and their children we are of the opinion that rinuitiplier of 14 would be appropriate In the present case 12) By multiplying the annuai dependency of Rs 24 000/- With the multiplier of 14 the compensation works out to Rs 3 36 000/- By adding further sum ot Rs.13,500/-;awarded by the Tribunal under other heads the claima’nts become entitled to receive a I total sum of R3349 500/- as compensation for the death of, ‘ deceased Narsmgh Dhurva In the motor acoldent 13) Learned counsel for the parties submitted that With a View to avord any possmle dispute between the parties about the y period for which the claimants are entitied to receive interest on the enhanced amount of compensation the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation may be quantified in this I r appealitself.‘ 7 14) Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter “ including the delay in disposal of the claim petition and the present appeal and the fact that the Insurance Company alone is not to be blamed for the entire delay in the matter, we quantify the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compenSation of Rs.72,000!- at Rs.6,000/—. it I V 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 2 77 500i— awarded by; x .p the Tribunal is enhanced toRs.3,49,500l— with furtherauantified i ‘/\i, g ‘ ‘ amount 6f interest of Rs.6,000/— on thJ‘enhanced‘amount of oompensation pf Rs.72,000/-. 16) Respondent No.2 the Oriental insurance Company Limited f is granted three months’ time for depoeiting the total sum o 1 Rs.78,000/- (Rs.72,_000f- towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.6,000/- towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensationi of Rs.72,000/-) before the concerningCiaims Tribunal. , ‘ 17) No order as to costs. nim mi _: : I Sd/- Sd/- Rangnath Chand Chief‘Justice T f Judge l Irakal‘ f} w