^ Appellants Cialmants jnsurer HSGH COURT OF CHHATTESGARH AT BILASPUR DjVJSION BENCH HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, CJ. HON'BLE SHRE SUNIL KUR4AR SINHA, J. rvissc. Appeal No. 342 of 2006, 1. Smt. Mamta Ashok Tharwani Aged about 35 years, W/o Late Ashok Tharwani. 2. Sanjay Ashok Tharwani aged about 16 years 3. Ku. Neha Ashok Tharwani aged about 14years. 4. Rohit Ashok Tharwani Aged about 12 years. 5. Kishan Chand Tharwani Aged about 73 years. No. 2 to 4 Ail S/o Late Ashok Tharwani, through natural guardlan mother Mamta Ashok Tharwani, AII R/o. Jarhabhata Sindhi Colony, Bilaspur (C.G.). VERSUS 1 Sushil Kumar Yadav, Aged about 24 years, S/o. Khorbahara Yadav R/o Bilahi. P.S. Shivrinarayan Distt. Janjglr- Champa (C.G.) 2 Raj Kumar Kediya, S/o. Bajrang Lai Kediya, R/o T.P. Nagar Korba, Distt. Korba (C.G.) another address Ganjpsra, Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G). 3. New india insurance Company Limited Through : Divisjonal Manager Rajendra Nagar Chowk, Bitaspur (C.G.) Respondents Dijver Owner 131see!laneous AppeaJ under Section 173 of IVIotoLVehldes Act_1988 Present: Shri A.L. Singraul, counsei on behalf of Shri Goytam Khetrapal, counsel for the appeliants. ORDER (27th Juiy,2009) The foilowing order of the Court was passed by RajeevGupta, CJ. Shri A.L. Singraul, iearned counsel for the appellants is heard on M.C.P.No.407/2006, a petstion for condonation of the delay in fiiing the appeai. 2) On due consideration of the submissions of Jearned counsel for the appellants and the grounds taken in the petition, we are satisfied that the appellants have succeeded in showing sufficient cause for the delay in filing the appeal. 3) M.C.P.No.407/2006, therefore, is aiiowed and the delay of ten days in filing the appeal is hereby condoned. 4) Shri A.L. Singraui, learned counsel for the appeilants is heard on admission. 5) The appeliants are seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Fourth Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 29.09.2004, passed in Ciaim Case No.11/2003. 6) As against the compensation of Rs.37.50,000/- ciaimed by the appeilants/ ciaimants, unfortunate widow, minor children and mother of deceased Ashok Kumar Tharwani by filing a daim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death In the motor accident on 11.08.2003, the Trlbunal awarded a totai sum of Rs.3,06,700/- as compensatlon along with interest @ 9% ^vm -*:" ffr per annum from the date of fiiing of the ciaim petition tilt the date of actuai payment. 7) Shri A.L. Singraul, jearned counsel for the appeliants vehemently argued that the Tribunai has erred in not accepting the claimants' evsdence about the income of the deceased and in assessing his income at Rs.2,000/- per month and 24;000/- per annum onty; and in awarding Eow compensation of Rs.3,06,700/- only. 8) True the claimants pleaded that deceased Ashok Kumar Tharwani used to earn Rs.300 - 400/- per day by running a Genera! Store, but the evidence ied in that behaif was not of clinching nature. The Tribunal, therefore, assessed his income at Rs.2,000/- per month and Rs.24,000/- per annum on its own estimate. 9) As the ciaimants faiied in adducing any cogent and reliable evidence about the income of the deceased before the Tribunal, we do not find any fault in the approach of the Tribunal in discarding the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased and in assessing his income on "rts own estlmate at Rs.2,000/- per month and Rs.24,000/- per annum only. 10) The claimants' dependency has been rightiy assessed by the Tribunai by deducting the usua! 1/3rd of the income of the deceased towards his personai expenses. 11) The multiplier of 16 selected by the Tribunal is rather on the higher side in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of New !nd!a Assursnce Co. Ltd. Vs. Kalpana and others, r 4 f subbu reported in 2WJ ACJ 82S, wherein the muitipSier of 13 was found to be appropriate for the deceased aged about 33 years and in the present case deceased Ashok Kumar Tharwani was aged about 40 years on the date of the accident. 12) For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any scope for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribuna! either on account of assessment of the jncome of the deceased or the claimants' dependency by the Tribunai or the multiptier seiected. 13) The appea! filed by the appellants/claimants for enhancement of the compensation, therefore, is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed summarily. Sd/- ChiefJustice Sd/- Sunil KumarSinha ^ Judge