^,'Y N^w IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR fC.G.) M.A. (C) No, APPELLANTS : CLAIMENTS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. ^{e .^ RESPONDENTS: NON-APPLICANTS 3. ^ _-^1 72007 Smt. Raniya Bai Pandariya, W/o Ramswarup Pandariya, Aged about 33 yrs. Ku. Riya Pandariya, D/o Late Ramswarup Pandariya, aged about 12 yrs. Ku. Damini Pandariya, D/o Late Ramswarup Pandariya, aged about 9 yrs. Kapil Pandariya, S/o Ramswarup • Pandariya, aged about 7 yrs. Ritik Pandariya, S/o Late Ramswarup . Pandariya, aged about 5 yrs. Ganesh Ram Pandariya, S/o Late Ramswarup Pandariya, aged about 55 » yrs. Smt. Jhulu Bai, W/o Ganesh Ram Pandariya, aged about 53 yrs. Appellant nos. 2, 3, 4& 5 are represented by legal guardian mother Smt. Raniya Bai^resident of Shyam Nagar, P.S-.Telibandha, Raipur, Tah. & Distt. Raipur (C.G.), Present address Vill. & P.0. Urala, P.S. Urala, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) VERSUS Lakhan Lal Gupta, S/o K. P. Gupta, R/o Mesors Vijay Kumar Inglo and Sons, Through Sai Baba Travels, New Bus Stand, Raipur, Tah. & Distt. Raipur(C.G.) Mesors Vijay Kumar Inglo and Sons, Through Sai Baba Travels, New Bus Stand, Raipur, Tah. & Distt. Raipur(C.G.) United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Through Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Kachahari Chowk, Jail Road, Raipur Mjscellaneous Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor ,' Vehicle Act. 1994 Beina aadrleved the iudament and award passed bv the 8th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. fF.T.C.t Raipur in Claim Case No. 21/2006. Judament dated 31/8/2006. in case of Smt. Raniva Bai and others Vs. Lakhan Lal Guota and others. ^" ^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR S.B: Hon'ble Shri Prashant Kumar Mishra APPELLANTS M.A. f0 No. 391/2007 : Smt Raniya Bai Pandariya and others Versus RESPONDENTS : Lakhan Lal Gupta and others Appearance: Shri S.C. Verma, counsel for the appellants. Shri S.S. Agravval, counsel for respondentNo.3. MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLE ACT, 1994 ORAL ORDER (17.06.2011) Heard on I.A. No. 1/2007 for condonation ofdelay in filing the appeal. (2) On due consideration, the, delay in filing the appeal is condoned. (3) Learned counsel for the appellants is heard on admis^ion. (4) This appeal under Section 173 ofthe Motor Vehicles Act has been preferred seeking enhancement of the amouiit of conipensation granted in favour ofthe appellants. (5) On perusal of the record it would appear that the deceased Ramswaroop aged about 35 years died on account of accident occurred on 5712/2004. According to the claimants the deceased was --^^^\working as elec^rical wire mechanic and was earning Rs.5000/- per 'month. However, the claimants have not submitted any licence issued ^^ (?3 by the competent authority entitling the deceased to work as electrical wire mechanic. (6) The electrical engineer under whom the deceased was working has been examined as AW-3 and has deposed that the deceased was paid monthly wages ofRs.8000/-. However, in view ofthe statement of the widow of the deceased learned claims tribunal has recorded a finding that the deceased vvas eaming Rs.3000/- per month. (7) On pemsal ofthe record it would also appear that for the age group of 35, multiplier of 17 has been applied which is not on the lower side. The tribuiial has also awarded Rs.5000/- for funeral expenses, Rs. 5000/- to the widow for loss of consortium and Rs. 5000/- each to claimants No.2 to 5 for loss of love and affection and equal amount of Rs.5000/- has been avvarded to the claimants No.6 and 7 vvho are the parents of the deceased for loss of love and affection on account of death of their son. The tribunal has thus awarded total sum of Rs.5,34,000/-. The amount awarded to the claimants appear to be just and proper. (8) This court does not find any scope for enhancement in the amount ofaward. (9) Consequently, the appeal fails aiid is hereby dismissed. Sd/- Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge v^-