3'Sf -qiqic-iq, ^Tf1^|(S, (cf^K-fy ^IH<TT Sh^licti ^R[ 200 311^1 M^ch (*icl^c'^) 3n^T^)Tf^TW cT?rr3TT^T9h^l<=h ^<TT^R^NW^?T HIGH COURT OF| M.A.. N0. 1392/2005 APPELLANTS CLAIMANTS RESPONDENTS NQNCLAIMANTS chl^f^l41T1 ^l^<rtT^:te^l'<f^^l< ^3Tf^T3TI^T CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR 1. Tejram Siaha, aged about 40 yrs, S/o Maagtooraai 2. Kuaiari Asha, aged abozit 14 yrs, D/o Tejram Siaha, Above botli R/o of Gram Silghat Tahsil : Kumd, Distt. Dhamtari, VERSUS KhUesh Kuinar, aged about 40 yrs, S/o Sahdev Sahu, R/oVm. : Borzhara, Tah.: Kurud, Distt. : Dhamtari. (C.G.) Gyaachaiid, aged about 36 years, S/6 Mangalchan.d, Jain, R/o ViU. Tahsil: Kumd, Dhaiatari, Gatapar, Distt. : Jainnalal, aged About 63 years, S/o Karaiodan Jain, R/ o ViUage : Borzhara, Talisil: Kurud, Distt. : Dhamtari, The OrientaJl Insuraace Coinpaiiy Ltd. Dhanitari (C.G.) XI-HC-78 3:[^T ^)T f^TW cCT'^TI^T^TT^ '^Sf ^WW^, ^W\<o, fc1dl<H>4,< <TT<4^TT Sti^lich ^T 200 ;^T <-15<ch ^TTW^TfNw^T Present: SliriK.R.Nair, ShriA.K.Athaley, counbel for the appeUants, c^iinsel for the respondent No.4/Insurer. Au^ust Dhirendra Mishra, J The appeUaats/clai|oiants the award dated 24th Motor Accident Claims 622/2004 whereby a fhem as conipeusation 21.9.2004 in a motor owned by respondent No, | 1 Khilesh Kuxaar at the SUpDL folr Leamed counsel foj claiais Tribunal has reslfcdcted niiaioiuni Rs.75,000/- 04 dependant upon deceasejd computing coiapensatLon| on fhe basis offhe notiony On Uie ofher No.4/iasuran.ee coinpan^ leamed claiias Tribunal chi^?<vi41-i ^i^^T^te^^^K ^3Tf^T3TT^T JUDGMENT (10thJuly 2007) have preferred this appeal agaiast 2005 passed by learaed Additional ITribunal, Dhanitari. in claim case No. of Rs.75,000/- has been awarded to fhe death of Sarswati Bai who died on \|ehicle accident involviag tractor/troUey |3 Jamnalal aad driven by respondent No. time, r^levant the appeUaats subiaits fhat the leamed the ainount of coiapensation to fhe ground fhat the appeUaats were not Sarswati Bai aiid for the purposes of inultipUer systein has not been adopted uicoine offhe deceased, h^ad, leanied cozuisel for respondent submits tih.at fhe reasons assigned by f^r not resortiag to multiplier system is m XI-MC-78 t^ 3^T ^iqK-t^, ^Tfl^^Ko, f^<ni^^< <n^«'TT»i^i<^ ^200 3-II^IUsich («^c|i^<st<^T) 3TT^T ^)T f^TToF cW3TT^T^TT^ ^RTTW^ffNw^T chi^?^i41ri ^i^<nT^:teT^i'<^d< ^3Tf^T3T^?T \ i; ! c accordance with facts of t] called for, I have heard leamed irapugned award as also| available on record ofthe le present case aad no iaterference is |counsel for fh.e parties aad perused tiie the oral aad docuinentary evidence clainis Tribunal. Leanied clamis Tribt that the deceased died as because of negUgent drivi4 the respondents have faile|( was beuig driven ia brea^: learaed claims Tribunal h^ on fhe ground tliat fhe ap[| upon deceased Sarswati B^ is contrarv to the estaby housewives who are no1 eniployiuent contribute to hom.e aud fhereforc, wher^ estabUshed it was proper conipensation by takrag r| 15,000/- per aanum. as d{ Section 163-A ofthe Motorl ^inal by titie iiapugned award has held |a result of accident which was caused [g on tlie part of rcspondent No. 1 aiid ^l to prove that fhe vehicle in question ^h of aay policy coudition. However, ks restdcted the clami to the niiniBiuBi ^eUaats/clamiaats were not dependaat ^i. The view taken by leamed Tribunal |shed law ui this regard as even the ofhenvise engaged io. aay gainful tiie famUy by rendering fheir services in iaconie of the deceased has not been ifor the learaed Tribunal to assess fhe ^otional income of fhe deceased at Rs. ^scribed in Schedule -2 appended wifh IVehicle Act, 1988. - P.T.O. XI-HC-78 3:ST •^II'^K-I^, ^Tfl'y'Ko, fc<^l'M^< 3TT^T^Tf^t^ cT§TT3TT^T$h^ich ^ *1FK^IT Sh+lich ^[ 200 i^TT^T (^t^^) ^TTW^INw^T slfie For the aforesaid rf sustaiaed and the appellaats/claiinants is deceased at Rs. 15,000/- l/3rd fh.erefroin, which aMve, the total dependenc|y Froia the record it appeaj|'s such circunistances, the In the result, jeasons, tiie iaipiigned award caiinot be corapensation payable to the ^ssessed by takiag notional uiconie of the ^er annuni aad after niakuig allowan.ee of would have spent on her had she been is assessed at Rs.10,000/- per aanuni. that fhe deceased was 35 years old, ia ^ppropriate niultiplier would be. 16. towards loss of depend consortiuin, ia. additiou t appeUants/claimants are out ofwhich Rs.75,000/ Tribunal, therefore, fhe € an additional suin of R <=hi^?^i41ri ^i^<y<T^f^t<Ri<-^i< ^3Tf^T3TT^T the appeal is atlowed. The appeUaats/clamiaiits ar^ awarded a sum of Rs. 1,60,000/- sncy, an additional suni of Rs,5,000/- towards love & affecticjn aad Rs, 10,000/~ towards loss of t> Rs.5,000/- already awarded by leamed claiais Tribunal towe|rds funeral expenses. Thus, fhe awarded a total suin of Rs.1,80,000/-, - has already been awarded by learaed .ppeUaats/claimaats are hereby awarded s.1,05,000/-. Respondent No. 4 shaU deposit the additional a^ount with the clamis Tribunal withia a of30 days froni to(B.av. Sd/- DHIRENDRA MISHRA Judge P.T.O.