^.p.^. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J. n^ Misc. Appeal (0 No.786 of 2008 Appellants Claimants 1. Smt. Rambati, Wd/o Baliram Patel, aged about 45 years. 2. Santosh, S/o Baliram Patel, aged about 30 years. 3. Dropti, D/o Baliram Patel, aged about 15 years. Through mother Smt. Rambati All are R/o Ward No. 12, Mahasamund, Tahsil & District - Mahasamund (C.G.) VERSUS Respondents Non-claimants |?"'UIIIU|» Nathuram Jangde S/o Punauram Jangde, aged about 32 years, R/o Bana (Banarsi), Police Station- Kharora, District-Raipur, (C.G.) (Driver of the offending vehicle bearingNo.C.G.19-H/0179) Raunlal Bundela S/o Shyamlal Bundela, aged about 40 years, R/o Amlidih, Raipur (C.G.) (Owner of the offending vehicle bearingNo.C.G.19-H/0179) The Oriental Insurance Company Limited,. Main Branch Office, Madeena Building, Jail Road, Raipur,(C.G.) (Insurer of offending vehicle No. C.G.10-H/0179) Policy No. 2007/3991 Appeal underSection 173 ofthe Motor Vehicle Act. "^..,. Present: Shri Awadh Tripathi and Shri Wasim Miya, counsel for the appellants. Shri C.K. Sahu, counsel for respondents No. 1 & 2. Shri Sudhir Agrawal and Shri P. Dutta, counsel for respondent No. 3 ORDER (16th June, 2011) 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 Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mahasamund (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 12.02.2008, passed in Claim Case No. 102/2007. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.22,50,000/- claimed by the appellants/ claimants, unfortunate widow and children of deceased Baliram Patel, by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 15.03.2007, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,48,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing 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 Baliram Patel died on account ofthe injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 1 5.03.2007; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver pf the offending vehicle Truck bearing registration No.C.G.- 19-H/0179; as the aboveoffending vehicle Truck on the date of -^•''-^,, :^-c^. //" '^ 'r l^ss^j \... '%^.-v |N^» the accident was insured with the Oriental Insurance Company Limited and the Insurance Company could not establish any breach of the policy conditions, the Insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimants. 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 income of the deceased at Rs.50/- per day; Rs. 1,500/- per month and Rs.18,000/- per annum. By deducting 1/3rd of Rs.18,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.12,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.12,000/- with the multiplier of 12, the compensation was worked out to Rs.1,44,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.2,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.2,000/- towards loss of consortium to the widow, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,48,000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Baliram Patel in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of Gompensation of Rs.1,48,000/- @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri Awadh Tripathi and Shri Wasim Miya, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the claimants' evidence about the income of the 7 deceased and in assessing his income at Rs.50/- per day; Rs.1,500/- per month and Rs.18,000/- per annum only; in selecting the lower multiplier of 12; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.1,48,000/- only. 7) Shri Sudhir Agrawal and Shri P. Dutta, learned counsel for respondent No.3, the Oriental Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Truck, on the other hand, supported the award and contended that as the deceased was not having any regular and definite income, the compensation of Rs.1,48,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 8) Shri C.K. Sahu, learned counsel for respondents No. 1 and 2, the driver and owner of the offending vehicle Truck, also supported the award. 9) In a motor acddent claim case, what is important is that, the compensation to be awarded by the Courts/Tribunals should bejust and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the case. It should neither be a meager amount of compensation, nor a Bonanza. 10) Now we shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.1,48,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 11) True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Baliram Patel r r used to earn Rs.200/- per day from his Chat Thela, no cogent and reliable evidence was led before the Tribunal to establish the ^^;<';"'TM^-: ...A. •^^ n) income of the deceased to that extent. In this state of evidence, we do not find any fault in the approach of the Tribunal in discarding the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased. 12) Nevertheless, the income of the deceased assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.50/- per day; Rs.1,500/- per month and Rs.18,000/- per annum in the year 2007 is certainly on the lower side and requires reconsideration. 13) Considering that deceased Baliram Patel was aged about 50 years on the date of the accident, we are of the opinion that he could have easily earned Rs.70-75/- per day even by working as an unskilled labour in the year 2007. We, therefore, propose to re-compute the compensation taking the income of the deceased at Rs.2,000/- per month and Rs.24,000/- per annum. 14) By deducting the usual 1/3rd of Rs.24,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency is assessed at Rs.16,000/- per annum. 15) Considering the age of the deceased, his widow and children, we are of the opinion that the multiplier of 13 would be appropriate in the present case in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt) and Others Versus Delhi Transport Corporation and another, reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121 wherein multiplier of 13 has been prescribed for the age group between 46-50 years. p^- .^"""'Tv~^'..'\ ,^'" ,,,,A ~'i<v\^ /Cl'l lssas»J ''"s<-^. ^ ^^ •-•v{',~s^^'" ^ 16) By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.16,000/- with the multiplier of 13 the compensation works out to Rs.2,08,000/-. The claimants are further entitled to receive Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses; Rs.5,000/- for loss of estate and Rs.5,000/- for loss of consortium to the widow. The claimants, thus, become entitled to receive a total sum of Rs.2,23,000/- as compensation for the death ofdeceased Baliram Patel in the motor accident. 17) Learned counsel for the parties submitted that with a view to avoid any possible dispute between the parties before the Tribunal 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 quantified in this appeal itself. 18) 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.75,000/- at Rs.7,000/-. 19) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs.1,48,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.2,23,000/- with further quantified amount of interest of Rs.7,000/- on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.75,000/-. ^::;-<w }!^'.\ subbu 20) Respondent No.3 the Oriental Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.82,000/- (Rs.75,000/- towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.7,000/- towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.75,000/-) before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 21) No order as to costs. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge f^^^^ ^^ r-: