^^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRI RL JHANWAR, J. Misc. Appeal No. 209 of 2003 Appellants Appiicants Kushalchand, S/o Late Sri Udalsidar, aged about 35 years Youraj, S/o Kushalchand Sidar, aged about 12years Chandrasekar, S/o Kushalchand Sidar, aged about 9 years Applicants No.2 & 3 are minor through natural guardian appeltant No.1 Kushalchand Sidar All are residents of Bhilai - 3 PS Bhilai Phase 3, Tahsil & Distt Durg Versus Respondents Non-applicants 1. Shyam Charan Verma, S/o Sri Raghae Verma, aged about 25 years, R/o Vill : Charoda Basti, Post : Jangiri, Tahsil S Dist : Durg (CG) 2. Bupendra Kumar Verma, S/o Sri Netram Verma, R/o Vill: Vermapara, Charoda Basti, Post : Jangiri, PS Bhiiai - 3, DJSt : Durg.(CG) .3. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Through : Divisional Manager Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., RSS M^rket, Power House, Bhilai, Tahsil & Distt Durg (CG) Miscelianeous Appeal underSection 173ofthe Motor Vehicles Act. 1988 S^SSSS"lAui'-~ ••—si:I--Si;-— -'^; ^.u Present : Shri BP Singh, counsel for the appellants. Shri MK Bhaduri, counsel for respondents No.1 and 2. Shri Abhishek Sinha, counsel for respondent No.3. 'ihiliBi'isi ORDER (19th April, 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 4 Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Durg (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 18.03.2002, passed in Claim Case No. 19/2000. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.24,70,000/-, claimed by the appellants/claimants, unfortunate husband, and minor children of deceased Lakshmin Bai by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for her death in the motor accident on 17.01.2000, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.65,700/- as compensation along with interest @ 9% 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 Lakshmin Bai died on account of the injuries sustained by her in the motor accident on 1 7.01.2000; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Jeep bearing registration No.MP-24 GC/0628; as the above offending vehicle Jeep on the date of the accident was insured with the Oriental Insurance Company Limited, and ;':-;^ "1. ;;ally/ IWitti the Insurance Company could not establish any breach of the policy conditions, the Insurance Company was liable to pay the compensation to the claimants. 4) As the respondents have not ftled any appeal against the award, the above findings recorded by the Tribunal have now attained finality. 5) The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.300/- per month and Rs.3,600/- per annum. By multiplying the annual figure of Rs.3,600/- with the multiplier of 17, the compensation was worked out to Rs.61,200/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.4,500/- under other heads, the Tribunat awarded a total sum of Rs.65,700/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Lakshmin Bai in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.65,700/- @ 9% per-annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri B. P. Singh, learned counsel for the appettants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased and in assessing her income at Rs.300/- per month and Rs.3,600/- per annum only; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.65,700/- only. 7) Shri Abhishek Sinha,.-leamed counsel for respondent No.3 the Oriental Insurance Company Limited, on the other hand, supported the award and contended that as the claimants could not establish the income of the deceased as pleaded by them, the compensation of Rs.65,700/-,awarded by the Tribunal is just and 4 proper compensation in the facts and cireumstances of the present case. 8) Shri MK Bhaduri, learned counsel for respondents No.1 Shyam Charan Verma and No.2 Bhupendra Kumar Verma, the dciver and owner of the offending vehicle Jeep also supported the award. 9) 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 cfrcumstances of the case. It should neither be a meager amount of compensation, nor a bonanza. 10) Now, we shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.65,700/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 11) True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Lakshmin Bai used to earn Rs.4,000/- per month by preparing candles and making boxes, no cogent and reliable evidence was led before the Tribunal to establish the above occupation ofthe deceased and her income to the extent of Rs.4,000/- per month. In this state of evidence, we do not find any fault in the approach of the Tribunal in discarding the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased. 12) Nevertheless, the income of the deceased assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.300/- per month and Rs.3,600/- per annum in the year 2000 is certainly on the lower side and requires reconsideration. "" i l-r:: B^iliL !'..iif \T- ;,te.'isSL^^i^ iiLSiriiifc:- .' ^': ^ S'f ,«^i! iiS'^iS^a 13) Considering that deceased Lakshmin Bai was aged about 32 years on the date ofthe accident and was residing at a village in the district of Durg, we are of the opinion that she could have easily earned Rs.70-75/- per dyey even by working as an unskilled labour in the year 2000. We, therefore, propose to re-compute the compensation by taking the income of the deceased at Rs.2,000/- per month and Rs.24,000/- perannum. 14) By deducting the usua! 1/3rd of Rs.24,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants'dependency is assessed at Rs.16,000/- per annum. 15) Considering the age of the deceased and her husband, we are of the opinion that multiplier of 15 would be appropriate in the present case. 16) By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.16,000/- with the multiplier of 15, the compensation works out to Rs.2,40,000/-. The claimants 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 husband. The claimants, thus, become entitled to receive a total sum of Rs.2,55,000/- as compensation for the death of deceased Lakshmin Bai in the motor accident. 17) 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 receive interest on the enhanced amount of compensation, the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation may be quantified in this appeal itself, ! 1' Kiit.J Jt ,i,l:' 18) 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.1,89,300/- at Rs.20,700/-. 19) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs.65,700/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.2,55,000/- with further quantified amount of interest of Rs.20,700/- on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.1,89,300/-. 20) Respondent No.3 the Oriental Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the totat sum of Rs.2,10,000/- (Rs.1,89,300/- towards .enhanced amount of Compensation + Rs.20,700/- towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.1,89,300/-) before the concerning Claims Tribunal. ——— i—— 21) No order as to costs. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- •^•t-,. Jhaawar Judge subbu