^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTSSGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLESHRIRAJEEVGUPTA,CJ. HON'BLE SHRS RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR J. Appeilants Ciaimants ^ Respondents Misc. Appeal (C.) No. 425 of 2010. 1. Smt. Nirmala Khichariya W/o Premnarayan Khichariya, aged about 45 years. 2. Premnarayan Miichariya S/o Late Shyamlal Khichariya, aged about 50 years Both R/o 275/A, Risali Sector, Bhiiaj, Police Station Nevai, District Durg Versus 1 Khalil S/o Santram Sawar, aged about 26 years, R/o viilage Karchul Nayapara, Police Station Nayapara, District Nayapara, Orissa. (Driver of Truck bearing registration No. C.G.-04/G/2221) 2 Krishna Agrawal S/o Late Harishankar Agrawal, R/o 7-c, L.I.A. (Light Industrial Area), Nandini Road, Bhilai, District Durg (C.G.) (Owner of Truck bearing registration No. C.G.-04/G/2221) 3 Branch Manager, National Insurance Company Umited, Akashganga Premises, Supela Bhilai, District Durg (Insurer) Misc. Appeal under Section 173 ofthe Motor Vehicle Act Present: Shri Malay Kumar Bhaduri, Jearned counsei for the appeliants. ORDER (22naApril,2010) f^ 1 l-~. hlm"lr^ The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. Shri Malay Kumar Bhaduri, learned counsel for the appellants is heard on admission. 2. The appellants are seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the 11th Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Durg (for short, 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 23.02.2010, passed in Claim Case No. 98 of 2008. 3. As against the compensatlon of Rs.46,72,264/- claimed by the appellants/ claimants, unfortunate parents of deceased Amit Kumar Khichariya, by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 06.11.2007, the TribunaJ awarded a total sum of Rs.4,05,320/- as compensation along with interest @ 8% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 4. Shri Malay Kumar Bhaduri, learned counsel for the appellants vehemently argued that the Tribunal has erred in not considering the pay revision of the deceased which was made effective from 01.01.2006 i.e. prjor to the accident which occurred on 06.11.2007; in deducting 50% of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses; in selecting the lower multiplier of 10; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.4,05,320/- only. 5. So far as the first submission of appellants' learned counsel about non-consideration of pay-revision of the deceased by the Tribunat is concerned, the law now is well settled in view of n ^;'^^ ::v- ^ i %?il^^ ^,^^y (^ the recent 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 it was observed in para 47: "..........................We therefore reject the contention that the revisions in pay scale subsequent to the death and before the final hearing should be taken note of for the purpose of determining the income for calculating the compensation." 6. The deduction of 50% of the income of the deceased by the Tribunal towards his personal expenses cannot be found fault with in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Syed Basheer Ahamed and others Versus Mohammed Jameel and another reported in (2009) 2 Supreme Court Cases 225. 7. The multiplier of 1 0, selected by the Tribunal also cannot be found fault with in view of the fact that the claimants are parents of the deceased and in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Miinicipal Corporation of Greater Bombay Vs. Laxman lyer and another, reported in (2003) 8 SCC-731, wherein it was held that in those cases where the claimants are parents ofthe deceased, the multiplier should never exceed 10. 8. For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any scope for enhancement of the compensation either on account of the assessment of the income of the deceased or the claimants' dependency by the Tribunal or the multiplier selected. ^3^2^ subbu 9. The appeal filed by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation, therefore, is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed summarr Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge