^tiAi. fcaib j 'A'y.a l.tity. Asy.js 'sitOittty. -Mtf fi51A fill^ &J,!AA jyjb 6S1S3, ^as^ 4^jt4^-s aMt3. fa3i6 S A^ia ^idty. -i.5 -iLiafc ryiaa %»ft*!!!<y. yuflkj. *MUi W &.1E -^ l£Uy. SlK4±lSte-<i'^^^ 1-MMiglak-i^^Uiff tBte-^5Jl6-im£ 'iE'a *A^ia j.wy.. *2.&tau± SS^SB. 'y-^S Ml? -yu-biy. ^tsy '^m 61 fiije &L^A 3KJ^ ,i!j,lnM. J.U1V. i].lt$ ^2 • *M£ 12 SlJE ^-l^ffi 3^jM te^kfei. J.Jiy. &p4.& M^ ^M- • ^ Site 'Mlfl S<1 MtC tep4A afy^S &yi&A jyja tej ?J,<fe ^tXfcJLl 4^4^ /^ ZA^ •.?•''.••' '.^y/ ^y 'A^X^ /i^f' /^^v/ ^v •&ib^ Nt-S&^ltE N~-^ti3-£aL£ aj- *IE*S JE^MA-J.&Ut *£-Mfi^a5<yji!E ^l.BViiC y. ^iMA as-y,tt6S Afet^ *••• sooe/^y urf °At ./. " - ' -/, tc'a j .iSu.utej.*Md.iua± &xe &EU4,4ia iiyifcbiM 1 / L\"-F\^\M^^^»^-f^^-<^rt ^/-_rtrv,-' ^^^^^.^^.^rl^^^r^^'^^^^''/y^w^>fr-*^^a^li^¥^^-^i^ c \t «>i w j w. \ B* 0) My I ^ \ i sf \ s-r ts 1 j^ i w .i* HiGH COURT OF CHHATTESGARH. BILASPUR w: Hon'ble Shri i.M. Quddusi, J. & Hon'ble Shri Prashant Kumar M ITi M.A.NO. 258 of 2005 Nationa! Insurance Company Li Versus Smt. Rajbai Korram and others. Shri Srikumar Agrawal, Senlor Advocate with Shri Ananc Gupta, counsel for the appaliant. Shri Vishnu Koshta, counsei for respondents No. 1 to 3. (11/04/2011) Following ora! order of the Court was passed by M. Quddusi. J. This appeal has been filed by the Nationai Insurance Company/appeliant against the impugned award dated 31/01/2005 of the IV Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (F.T.C.). Kanker (C.G.) in Ciaim Case No. 49/2004 so far as it has imposed the liabi'ity to pay compensation upon the Insurance Company. The claimants have also nled cross objection M.C.P. No1419/2005 for enhancement of the compensation. (2) Brief facts of the case, as per the version of the ciaimants, are that on 21/02/2004 deceased Phoolsingh Korram was going to Kanker for school work in his motorcycle Hero Honda bearing registration No. C.G. 19 BO/101. Along with deceased Phool Singh, Mahesh Surajiya was also sitting as piiiion rider. As soon as they reached across the village Daspur, vehicle Jeep bearing registration No. 19 Z.T/0196 coming from Kanker side being driven rashly and negligently by its driver Gajendra Sahu dashed Hero Honda, as a result of which Phoolsingh Korram dled on the spot. Deceased was Government Teacher and used to get salary Rs. 10.070/- per month. He was aged about 50 years. in addition to his job I'G^1 1 2- he used to earn Rs. 20.000/- by doing agriculturai work in his ancestral agricultural land of 5 acre area. Claimants have ciaimed compensation of Rs. 16,83,400/-. (3) Learned counsel for the Insurance Company/appellant has submitted that the vehicle was being used for commereial purpose whereas it was insured as a private car and the witness appeared for the Insurance Company R.K. Xalxo N.A.-1 has stated that it was for a private purpose, however we have perused ttie insurance poticy in which the registration number of the vehicle has been mentioned as C.G. 19 ZT 0196. It is mentioned in the poiicy "Certificate of Insurance of Passengers Carfying Commercial Vehicle" and it is "Liability only". The Insurance was effective from 31/12/2003 and up to midnighi of 30/12/2004. The date of accident is 21/02/2004, thererore the policy covers the insurancs regarding third party. (4) In view of the above, the plea that thers was breach of condition of the insurance policy is not sustainabte. (5) With regard to cross objection, we have seen that age of the deceased was few days more than 50 years and according to the case of Saiia 'v'erma (Smt) and others vs. Defhi Transport CorpQratfon and another, reported in (2009) 6 S.C.C. 121 a muitiplier of 11 should have been appiied and over other heads also the compensation has not been given adequately, therefore we rsassess the amount of compensat'on as imdec. (6) The income of the deceased according to his saiary as he was Head Master in the school was Rs.10,070/- per month and thus the annuai income comes to Rs.1,20,840/-. Out of which 1/3 is to be deducted for personai and living expenses and the remainder comes to Rs. 80.560/-. After applying muitiplier of 11 the total loss of dependency comes to r; y ^ Rs. ^,86,160/-. Besides this, the widow claimant No.1 is entitled to get Rs.5,000/- for loss of consortium, two claimants are entitled to get Rs.5,000/-each for lossof love and affeetion, the claimants are entitled to get further sum of Rs.5,000/- for funeral expenses and Rs.5,000/- for loss of estate. Thus, the total towards other heads comes to Rs. 25,000/-. Therefore, the total amount of compensation comes to Rs. 9,11,160/-. (7) Therefore.thecross objectlonare liableto be allowed to the above extent, The cross objection M.C.P. No. 1419/2005 is allowed. The amount of compensation isenhanced to that of Rs.9,11,160/-. (8) However, the Tribunal has imposed penal interpst @ 9% besides 6% simple interest which is not proper, thereforethat part of the Tribunal award is liable to bs set-aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed in part to that extent. The appeal is allowed in part. (9) The claimants shall be entitled to get simple interest @ 6% per annum only. The penal interest part in the award isset-aside. (10) The claimantNo.1 widowof thedeceased Smt. Rajbai Korramshall be entitled to get the entire amount of compensation except Rs.20,000/- which shall be paid to the claimants No. 2 & 3equally i.e.s'Rs.10,000/- each. (11) The award is modified to the aboveextent. • (12) No order as to costs. Sdl- iM.Quddusi judge Sd/- Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge 1.^.