CP Dlvisioii Bgnch IN THE HON'BLE HIGH CQURT OF CHHTTISGARH AT BILASPUR C.G. APPELLANTS -<PPLICANTS M.A.(C)NO. ^D /2007 1, Smt. Manjulata W/o. Late Rajesh SMh Age- 26 years 2. Akash S/o Rajesh Sinh Age 5 years 3. ..•^sc Ashish ^ S/oRajeshSinh -^, / Age-3 years Minor 2 & 3 through legal guardian Smt. Manjulata 4. Smt. Vimala Devi W/o Dhananjay Sinh Thakur All R/o Kandarka, P.S. Kumhari, Tah. Dhamdha, Distt. Durg (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS: /^ON-APPLICANTS ^I..^-^v^ w-k:~^^ '•••'' ' . •. u-rftrt* c' ^Ms^"- 1. ^' Naresh Nisad S/o Dashrath Nishad R/o Gram- Gabda, P.S. Barela Distt. Durg (Driver) 2... Dhananjay Sinh Thakur S/o Mannulal R/o Gram- Kandarka, P.S. Kumhari, Distt. Durg C.G. (Owner) 3. Zonel Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Paras Complex, Near Gurudwara, Station Road, Durg, Distt. Durg, C.G. (Insurance Co.) <«-" ^ APPEAL U/S 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLE ACT 1988 AWARDED AMOUNT Rs/- 4,28,976=00 CLAIMED AMOUNT Rs/- 24,00,000=00 \^^-'-^' VALUATION OF CLAIM AMOUNT Rs/- 24,00,000=00 <S~<rcf •<ll'lll(rt<l|, 8iTf1«'IS, R|rt|y^< _^^!-1'/\.C- ?-? o tlWdl *NI*' ^ 200"7 an^r xra^ (•'pf^g^i) 3Ilt?I?iI R-fi* ~^IT3lK5Ts(>t<l+ ^y ^arar'Hfro an^r O&^L i'BI 31.07.2007 Shri Rajkumar Gupta, coun; Shri Pankaj Agrawai, Advot of respondent no.S/insurance Cot servsd upon him. Learned counsel for the of 17. As the limited question is in| counsel for the partles prayed for fl Heard. This appeal has been pref^ 1988 being aggrieved by the /^ ;lil«l[<!1<ill'W^i TJ felSt ^R^R ^SlRiq 3)1^1 forthe appellants. |ate, is directed to take notice on beha!f ipany. Copy of memo of this appea! ppeilants submiis that the oniy point involved in this appeal is that the rjiuitipiier of 16 has been appiied instead /oived in this appeai, therefore, iearned nai disposai. red u/s 173 of the Motor Vehlcles Act 'ard dated 26.3.2007 passed by the Second Add'l. Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Durg, in Ciaim Case No.43/2006 whereby the iearnec| and assessing the annuai defjendency to be Rs.24,939/-, granted ipensation of Rs.4,08,976/-. Tribunal appiying the muitip!!er of 16 |n addition to that, Rs.10000/- tov/ards funeral expenses and Rs.10,000;- as ioss of consortium have been awarded. Thus a totai award of|Rs.4,28,976/- has been passed by the Tribunal. i We have heard iearned cotsnsei t'or the parties. Admittediy, the age of the ijeceased Rajesh Singh was 35 years at the time of accident; therefore^lhe muitipiier of 17 ought to have been applied instead of 16. •':A^'^ucil;,.ithe daimants are entitted for GRPRJ — FS/ !'.w^tsfWSKiasSlSSSf^ 3^T -^liiw^, (jnflti'lti, [sj<?liy^< ^r ^fe..HAC^...,-o,,^ an^r WR; ('rta^sT) sii^r.^T R-ijcfi wnsTCT %IIRT '< TOirar ^ifer aii^r Rao --L- .-I en'nancement to the tune of Rs.24, awarded'against the dependency. Vimla Devi, mother of the deceas' Therefore, in addition to the enhani is oranted towards love and affectii the total enhanced amount comes In the r.esult, the appeal js| amount is being enhanced by Rs| which has already been awarded t| directed to pay the compensation] a!so be entitled for interest thered application, as av/arded bythe clai| ^l Cc as per ruies. Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge *W[<'l'li)-f IITtRff ^f ft^t 'rfSR^R ^ajfgiran^r f'SQi- in addition to the amount already It is argued that appeilant no.4 Smt. jd, has not been awarded any amount. amount of Rs.24,339/-, Rs.10000/- In ofthe rnother Smt. Vimia Devi. Thus Rs.34,939/-. partiy ailov»'ed and the compensation [34,939/- in additlon to Rs. 4,28,976!- |y the Tribunai. The respondent no.3 is of Rs.4,63,915/'-. The ciaimants shall in @ 6% per annum from the date of ns Tribunal. Sd/- SunilKumar Judge Sinha r^t>3S 6— 2/2007— 50.UUU.