"\Ai F. ”k M HEGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CORAM: ‘ HON’BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. i ON’BL SHRI SUIL UMAR INH, J. DIVISION BENCH ‘ Apgeilants Claimants Misc. AQQeaI No.37 of 2003 1 Bhanbati, Wd/o Bhupendra Kumar aged about 24 years Umeshwari Bai, D/o Bhupendra Kufnar, aged about051years Hiteshwari Bai, D/o Bhupendra Kumar, aged [about 02 years Appellant No.2 and 3 aré minor through the naturai guardian of Mothen Bhanbati Wd/o Bhupendra Kumar uAu R/o vmage ; Bortara, Tahsii — Gurur, Distt Durg (CG) ‘ VERéUS :‘Narayan Rao, S/o' Appa Rao, R/o I‘VRésgondents'? . f Non—appiic'ahts; Sankurti street ' Salur, District ijayanagram (AP) CH Panudu, S/o Appa Rao, R/o Main Road, Kotvalsa, Distt ~ Vijayanagram (AP) National I lnsurance Company ltd. Branch Office Noi‘l Dwarika Nagar Vishakhapatnam (AP) Dhirendra KumarWS/o Bhawanjl, age 40 years, R/o Shalewar Para, Dhamtari (CG) x w, Shanker Lal, S/o Manrakhan Lal, Age 38 years, R/o Station Para, DFitar (CG) V The Oriental insurance Company Ltd., Branch Office Dhamtari, Dist Dhamtari (CG) " a y i HE N K SA , 3 F ‘ V L ami axm Bai, W/o Ramadhn, g 48 Li i ae years Ramadhin, S/o VishaL age 51 years Respondents No.7 and 8 are r/o ViHage — Bortara, Tah Gurur, Distt Durg (CG) Miscellaneous Appeal under Section~173 of Motor Vehicles Act Present .: Shri Awadh Tripathi and Shri Sanjeev Banjare, counsel for the appellants. None for respondents No.1, 2 and 4. Shri Gautam Khetrapal, counsel for respondent No.3. Shri Gautam Bhaduri, counsel for respondent No.5. , Shri SK Mishra, counsel for respondent No.6. Shri CK Sahu, counsel for respondents No.7 and 8. ’ ORDER (11th March,rzo11) The following order of the Court was passed ‘by Rajeev Gupta; C.J. This is claimants’ appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dhamtari (for. short ‘the Tribunal’) vide awardvdated 10.08.2002, passed in Claim Case No.199/2002. 2) As against, the compensation of Rs.11,50,000/~, claimed by the appellants/claimants, unfortunate widow, minor children of deceased Bhupendra Kumar by filing a claim petition under Section Q 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident‘on 02.05.2000, the’Tribunal awarded a total sum ofRs.1,18,000/- as ‘compensation to the claimants along with. interest @ 7.5% ’per //n \ / " annum from the date of the filing of the claim petition till the date of’ actual payment. i K 3) Tjhe Tribunal o‘n a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held‘that deceased Bhupendra Kumar died on account of the injuries sUstained by him in the motor accident onVG2_.‘OV5.2()VOO; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent drwmg of the driver of the offending vehicle Truck bearing registration No AP-5T/2749 as the above offending vehicle Truck on the date of the accident was sured With the National insurance Company Limited and the insurance Company could not establish any breach of the policy conditions, the insurance Company was liabie to fpay the compensation to the claimants . '4), As the respondents have not fled any appeal against the award the above findings recorded by the Tribunal have now attained finality d 5) The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at R51 300/— per month By deducting Rs 400/— towards the personal expenses of the deceased the claimants dependency was V assessed at RsQOOI- per month and Rs 10 800l- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs 10 800l- with the multiplier ' of 10 the compensation was worked out to Rst O8 OOO/— By V awarding further sum of Rs 10 OOOI- under other heads the Tribunal ’ ‘ awarded a total sum of Rs.1,18,000/— as; compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Bhupendra kumar in the motor r- acCrdent. The Tribunal further directed payment of interesti; _’ on the above amount of ‘ compensation of Rs.1,1:18,000/-% @ _ @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shr'i Awadh Tripathi and Shri Sanjeev Banjare, teamed counsel lfor the appellants submitted that the Tribunal has erfed in ssessing the income of the deceased at Rst ,300l- per month only; in selecting the lower multiplier of 10; and in awarding low ' ompensation of Rs’.1,18,000/— only. c 7) Shri Gautam Khetrapal, learned counsel for respondent No.13 the National insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending :Vehicle Truck on the other hand supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.1,18,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is‘ just and proper compensation in the factsland Circumstances of the present case 8), Shri Gautam Bhaduri and Shri SK Mishra learned counsel for he owner and insurer of other‘vehiole Jeep in which the deceased as travelling also supported the award 9) Shri CK Sahu learned counsel for respondents No 7 and 8 Laxmi Bat and Ramadhin, the parents of deceased Bhupendrar Kumar submitted that the compensation of Rs.1,18,000‘/- awarded by the Tribunal is too low and deserves to be enhanced in this appeat 1Q) \ln a motor accident claim 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 circumstances of the case. it should neither be a meager amount of compensation, nor" at bonanza g a t w 11) Now, we ’shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.1,18,00Q/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper. compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case.‘ 12) True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Bhupendra Kumar used to earn Rs.2,000/- per month by working as Conductor in the Jeep, the Tribunal has assessed the income of the deCeased at Rs‘.1 ,300/7‘per month only. 13) Considering that deceased B‘hupendra Kumar was aged about 27 years,’we are of the opinion that he could have easily earned Rs.70-75/-’ per day even by working as unskilled labour. We, therefore, propose to re-compute the compensation taking the income of the deceased at Rs.2,000/— per month and Rs.24,000i’— per'annum. 14) By deducting the usuai 1/3'“ of Rs.24,000/— towards the ' ersonal expenses of the deceased, the claimants’ dependency is p assessed fat Rs.1 6,000/4 per annum. 15) Considering the age of the deceased, his widow and minor children, we are of the opinion that multiplier: of 16 wouid be appropriate in the present case. 16) By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.16,000f- with the mUltiplier of 16, the compensation works out to,lRs.2,5.6,000/-. The claimants, are further/entitled to receive Rs.5,000!- towards funeral expenses; Rs.5,0DO/- for loss of estate; and Rs.5,000/— for less of consortium to the widow. The claimants, thus, become entitled to receive atotal sum’of Rs.2,71 ,000/- as compensation for the death of deceased Bhupendra Kumar tn the motor accident. 17) Learned counsel for the parties submitted that with a View to avoid any possiblerdispute between the parties before the Tribunai 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‘quantifted in this appeal itself. ' 18) Consmlenng 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.1,53,'000f¢ at Rs.12,900/—. ‘19) The entire enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.1,53 000/- and the quantified amount of interest of Rs 12 000/- shall be payble to the appellants the unfortunate Widow and minor children of deceased Bhupendra Kumar and respondents‘ No7 and 8 parents of the deceased are not entitled to get any share fromthis amount. - ' i i 20) Forthe foregoing reasons, the appeal filed'bythe appellants/ p l; claimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The compensation of Rsi1 18000/- awarded by the'Tribunal is enhanced to Rs 2 71 OOOI- With further quantified amount of interest ' of Rs120G0l- on the enhanced amount of compensation :of‘ Rs.1 ,53,000/-. ‘ 21) Respondent No.3 the National insurance Company Limited is granted three months’ time “for depositing the (D total sum ,of f 1 ‘ :43 @ Rs.1,65,000/— (Rs.1,53,000/- towards enhanced lamount of compensation + Rs.12,000/— téwards quantified amount of intereét on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.1,53,DOO/-) before the concerning Claims Tribunai. ~ 22) The entire amount of R.s..1,53,000/-, the enhanced amount of i v _ compensation and Rs.12,000/-, quantified amount of interest to be . deposxted by respondent No3 the National insurance Company Limited shall be payable to the appellants alone who are the Widow I and minor children of deceased Bhupendra Kumar 23) Noorder asto costs. I ”f \ l Sunll Kumar Smha \ Judge ‘ 4 /« Sci/- V A I ‘l, CHIEF “la—m JUSTICE a L mp rajmw ‘? ‘ padma mowww,