%J"' HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BSLASPUR DIVISIONBENCH' CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEVGUPTA, CJ. HON'BLE SHRS RANGNATHCHANDRAKAR, J itlHil'i. K w ^ -^. ADDellanfs Claimants ResDondents (Non-applicants) Mlsc. ADpeai (C) No.18 of 2006 1. Smt. Kavsala, W/o Late Gopi, 49 years 2. Lalit, S/o Late Gopi, 29 years Both R/o Patelpara, Kondaloor, Tehsi!— Jagdalpur, Distt Bastar (CG) VERSUS 1, Nokarao, S/o B Raju, 26 years, R/o Balaji Photo Studio, Jagdalpur, Dist Bastar(CG) 2. Vikas Jain, S/o Late Vimai Jain, 27 years, R/o Main rRoad, Sonarpai, Dist Bastar(CG) 3 The Orientai insurance Company Through - The Branch Manager, Main Road, Jagdalpur (CG) 4 Sukhram.S/o Late Gopi, 30 years 5 Shambhu, S/o LateGopi, 27yeas Respondents No.4 and 5 are r/o Patelpara, Kondaloor, Tehsil Jagdalpur, Distt Bastar (CG) Miscellaneous Appeal under Section 173 of iVIotor Vehicies Act Present : S.hri Praful! Bharatand ShriVikas Shrivastava, counsel fortheappeilants. Shri.SudhirAgrawal, counsel for respondent No.3. ORDER ,./. c ^l ,€ "^. (16tnMarch,2011) The fotlowing order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. The unfortunate widow and son of deceased Gopi are the appellants beforeus in this appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Fourth Additionai Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bastar at Jagdalpur (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 26.11.2005, passed in Claim Case No.10/2005. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.4,10,000/-, ciaimed by the appetlants/claimants, unfortunate widow and son.of deceased Gopi by filing aclaim petition under Section 166 ofthe Motor Vehides Act, for his death in the motoraccident on 02.12.2004, the Tribunai awarded a total sum of Rs.1,27,000/- ascompensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of the filing of the claim petition tili the date of actual payment. 3) The Tribunal on a ciose scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it heid that deceased Gopi died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 02.12.2004; the accident occurred due to rash and negiigent driving ofthe motorcyciist of the offending vehicie motorcycle bearlng registration No.C.G.17B/7924; as the above offending vehicle motorcycje on the date of the accidentwas insured with the Oriental Insurance Company Limited, and the Insurance Company could not estabtish any breach of the poticy Condjtion's, the insurance Companywas liabie to pay the compensation to the claimants. 1 \^sWS^S ^ff f?i^m i:l^'v^sSs£* ^ •^u' ^c .:/ € 4) As the respondents have not filed any appeal against the award, the above findings recorded by the Tribunat have now attained finality. 5) The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.50/- perday; Rs.1,500/- per month and Rs.18,000/- perannum. By deducting 1/3rd of Rs.18,000/-towardsthe personalBxpenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.12,000/- perannum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.12,000/- with the muttiplier of 10, the compensation was worked » outto Rs.1,20,000/-. By awarding further sum ofRs.7,000/-under other heads, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,27,000/- as compensation to theclaimants for the deat'n of deceased Gopi in the motor accident. The Tribuna} further directed payment of jnterest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.1,27,000/- @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the ciaim petition titl the date of actual payment. 6) • Shri Prafull Bharat and Shri Vikas Shrivastava, learned counsel for the appeilants 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.50/- per day; Rs.1,500/- per month;and Rs.18,000/- per annum only;and in awarding lowcompensationof Rs.1,27,000/- only. 7) Shri Sudhir Agrawai, learned cpunsel for respondent No.3 the Orientai Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle motorcycle, on the other hand supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.1,27,000/- ;.i:1^^^ .1,.^:-^ W& J^s^ 'l %..,:s^ "^:^KSV^W 4 <. T" awarded by the Tribunal is just and propercompensation in the facts and circumstances ofthe present case. 8) In a motor accident clajm case what is important is that the compensation to be awarded by the Courts!/ Tribunalsshould be just and proper compensation in the facts andctrGumstances of the case. Jt should neither be a meager amount of compensation, nor abonanza. 9) Now, we shall examine as to whether the compensation 6f Rs.1,27,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances ofthe present case. 10) True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Gopi used toeam Rs.100/- per day; Rs.3,000/- per month from agriculture and by working as Labour, the evidence led in that behalf was not of dinching nature. We, therefore, do not find any fault in the approach of the Tribunal in discarding the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased. 11) Nevertheless, the income of the deceased assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.50/- perday; Rs.1,500/- per month and Rs.18,000/- per annum in the year 2004 is certainly on the lower side and requires reconsideration. 12) Considering that deceased Gopi was aged about55 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 unskiited labour. We, therefore, propose tp recompute the compensation taking the income of the deceased at Rs.2,000/- per month and Rs.24,000/- per annum. ^^^- "^. •"^".^^•^•^ / i .•^ '^:,"' 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.16,0007-per annum. 14) Considering the age ofthe deceased and his widow, we are satisfied that the mujtiplierof 10 seiected by the Tribuna! is appropriate in the present case. 15) By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.16,0007- with the multiplier of 10, the compensationWorks out to Rs.1,60,000/-. The claimants are further entitled to receive Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses; Rs.5,000/- for ioss of estate; and Rs.5,000/- towards loss of consortium to thewidow.The claimants, thus, become entitied to receive a totai sum of Rs.1,75,000/-as compensation for the death of deceasgd Gopi in the motor accident. 16) The claimants are further awarded a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.48,000/-. 17) For the foregoing reasons, t'ne appeal filed by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation is ailowed in part. The compensation of Rs.1,27,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.1,75,000/- with further quantified amount of interest of Rs.5,000/- on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.48,000/-. 18) Respondent No.3 the Oriental Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.53,000/- (Rs.48,000/- towards enhanced 'amount of compensation + Rs.5,000/- towards quantified amount of interest ';$ I. ^ .f .y on the enhancedamount of compensation of Rs.48,000/-) before the concerning Claims Tribunat. 19) No order as to costs. Sd/- ChiefJustice subbu Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge c.