..^•^^ ^.F.^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH f^-7/ CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, CJ. & HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J. Misc. Appeal (C) No. 1455 of2009 Appellants ^.... Respondents Driver Owner Insurer Smt. Kala Bai, w/o late Shri Dhansay, aged about 35 years, Joshen Kumar s/o late Shri Dhansay, aged about 16 years, Ku. Khemlata d/o late Shri Dhansay, aged about 14 years, Makhanlal s/o late Shri Dhansay, aged about 12 years, Appellant no. 2 to 4 is minor, through natural guardian of mother Smt. Kala BaiAppellantNo.1 All the appellants are resident of village and post Lohattar, P.S. Durgukondal, district South Bastar Kanker (Chhattisgarh) VERSUS Shravan Kumar Netam, s/o Tulsiram Netam aged about 40 years, resident of village and post Sambalpur, tahsil Bhanupratappur, district South Bastar Kanker C.G. Pawan Kumar s/o Shankarlal Rathi, resident of village and post Sambalpur, tahsil Bhanupratappur, district South Bastar C.G. The New India Insurance Company Limited, through Branch Manager, Branch Officer, Project, near Auto Mobile, G.E. Road, Power House, Bhilai, district Durg C.G. 1 1 i^^ ^•^.M^ MACNo.1455 of 2009 Memo of appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act Present: Shri Prakash Tiwari, counsel for the appellants. Shri Sudhir Agrawal and Shri P. Dutta, counsel for respondent No.3. ORDER >th (12InAugust,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 Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhanupratappur, district Kanker (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 30.06.2009, passed in Claim Case No.44/2008. 2) As against the compensation of Rs. 10,30,000/- claimed by the appellants/ claimants, unfortunate widow and minor children of deceased Dhansay, by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 06.03.2008, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,75,000/- as cpmpensation 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 Dhansay died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 06.03.2008; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Metador bearing registration No.CG-04-G/3386; as the above offending vehicle Metador on the date of the accident was insured with the New India --A y MACNo.1455 of 2009 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 challenging the above findings recorded by the Tribunal, the same now have attained finality. 5) The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- per annum on the basis of the notional income prescribed in the Second Schedule under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act. By deducting 1/3rd of Rs.15,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.10,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.10,000/- with the multiplier of 16, the compensation was worked out to Rs.1,60,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.15,000/- under other heads, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,75,000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Dhansay in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.1,75,000/- @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri Prakash Tiwari, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased and in assessing his income at Rs.15,000/- per annum only; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.1,75,000/- only. MACNo.1455 of 2009 ^ 7) Shri Sudhir Agrawal and Shri P. Dutta, learned counsel for respondent No.3, the New India Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Metador, on the other hand, supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.1,75,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 8) In a motor accident claim case, what is important is that, the compensation to be awarded by the Courts/Tribunals should be just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the case. It should neither be a meager amount of compensation, nor a Bonanza. 9) Now we shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.1,75,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 10) True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Dhansay used to earn Rs.3,000/- per month as Labour, the Tribunal has assessed his income at Rs.15,000/- per annum on the basis of the notional income prescribed in the Second Schedule under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act. As the evidence led by the claimants about the income of the deceased was not of clinching nature, we do not find any fault in the approach of the Tribunal in discarding the claimants' evidence about the income ofthedeceased. 11) Nevertheless, the income of the deceased assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.15,000/- per annum in the year 2008 is certainly on the lower side and requires reconsideration. MACNo. 1455 of 2009 ^ 12) Considering that deceased Dhansay was aged about 40 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 2008. 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. 13) 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. 14) Considering that deceased Dhansay was aged about 40 years on the date of the accident, we are of the opinion that the multiplier of 15, 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 15 has been prescribed for the age group between 36-40 years. 15) By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.16,000/- with the multiplier of 15 the compensation works out to Rs.2,40,000/-. Theclaimants 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.2,55,000/- as compensation for the death of deceased Dhansay in the motor accident. 16) 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 ^ ..\ MACNo.1455 of 2009 UO 1 , receive interest on the enhanced amount of compensation, the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation may be quantified in thi$ appeal itself. 17) 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.80,000/- at Rs.8,000/-. 18) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs. 1,75,0007- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.2,55,000/- with further quantified amount of interest of Rs.8,000/- on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.80,000/-. 19) Respondent No.3 the New India Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.88,000/- (Rs.80,000/- towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.8,000/- towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.80,000/-) before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 20) No order as to costs. _- Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge subbu