o'y-^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEBV GUPTA, CJ. HON'BLE SHRI T.P. SHARMA, J. Ta~7|~^~~T^J7^7' M.A. (Cl PR No. 279 of 2009 APPELLANTS €. RESPONDENTS 1. 2. 3. 4. Smt. Kumari Bai, W/o Ramcharan Sahu, Aged 40 years Ramcharan Sahu, S/o Late Ramdayal Sahu, Aged about 43 years Kumari Rekha Sahu, D/o Ramcharan Sahu, Aged about 18 years, Kumari Yashoda, D/o Ramcharan Sahu, Aged about 16 years Appellant No.4 appellant No.4 legal guardian Kumari Bai Sahu on behalf of minor through Mother Smt 1. 2. 3. All are resident of Pt. Dindayal Upadhaya Nagar, Thana D.D. Nagar, Tahsil & District Raipur (C.G.) Versus Raju Singh Soni, S/o Mayaram Soni, R/o Pandari Cloth Market Thana Pandari, District Raipur (C.G.) Jageshwar Sahu, S/o Umrao Sahu, R/o Village Khisora, Tahsil Kurud, Distrtet Dhamtari (C.G.) The New India Insurance Company Limited, Through : Branch Manager, Madina Building. Jail Road, Raipur (C.G.) Appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act. 1988 Present: Shri A. S. Iqbal, leamed counsel for the appellants. ORDER (03nlMarch,2009) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. Shri A.S. Iqbal, leamed counsel for the appetlants is heard on admission. 2) The appellants are seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the 10th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur (for short, *the Tribunal') vide award dated 30.09.2008, passed in Claim Case No.11/2008. 3) As against the compensation of Rs.12,50,000/- claimed by the claimants, unfortunate parents and sisters of deceased Chintamani @ Chinta by filing a clalm petition underSection 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 01.12.2007, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.3,72,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date ofthe filing ofthe claim petition till the date of actual payment. 4) Shri A.S. Iqbal, teamed counsel for the appellants vehemently argued that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the daimants' evidence about the income of the deceased and in assessing his income at Rs.3,000/- per month and Rs.36,000/- per annum; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.3,72,000/- only. -'/-^ 5) True, the clalmants pleaded that deceased Chlntamani @ Chinta used to earn Rs.6,000/- per month as Mans^er in Tolt Tax Post, Gadadih, but the evidence led in that behalf was not of clinching nature. The Tribunal, therefore, while discarding the evidence led by the claimants about the income of the deceased, assessed his income at Rs.3,000/- per month and Rs.36,000/- per annum on its own estimate. 6) On due consjderation, we do not find any infirmity in the assessment of the income of the deceased by the Tribunal at Rs.3,000/- per month and Rs.36,000/- per annum. 7) The Tribunal has been quite liberal in deducting only 1/3rd of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses though the deduction in that behalf could have been to the extent of 2/3 ofthe income ofthe deceased in view ofthe dictum ofthe Apex Court in the case of Dwiat Louls Machado & Ors. Vs. L. Ravindra And Others, reported in 2000(1) T.A.C.208 (SC), as deceased Chintamani @ Chinta on the date of the accident was unmamed and would have been married in due course and after his marriage his contribution to the parents would have been reduced substantially. 8) The multiplier of 15 selected by the Tribunal is rather on the higher side in view of the dtetum of the Apex Court in the case of Municipal Corporatlon ofGreater Bombay Vs. Laxman tyer and another, reported in (2003) 8 SCC-731, wherein it was held that in those cases where the claimants are the parents of the deceased, the multiplier should never exceed 10. .4'-" subbu 9) For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any scope for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal either on account of the income of the deceased orthe claitnants' dependency assessed by the Tribunal or the multiplier setected. 10) The appeal, therefore. is liabte to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed summarny on merits notwithstanding that it is time-barred' by 16 days. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge ^h