CANC IN THE HIGH COURT OF 3UDICATURE AT BILASPUR . />^t^/ -[ ^' /",' MIS. APPEA.lMoJ^^OQ, SinglB BencR APPLICANT/APPELLANT ^•^ ^..^ ....--•^•f-^.^ ^^^•^' •) 1. G. VENKAT RAO AGED 25 yrs Son of Sri V. Satyanaryan Rao 2. ANIKET RAO minor Aged 2-1/2 Son of Sri G. Venkat Rao naturally guardian father Sri G. Venkat , Both Residents of a House at Nahar Para , NearAngan Badi Kapa , Police Station House Mowa , Raipur City., Tahsil and District Raipur Chhattisgarh. VE RS U S. RESPONDENT 1. VINAY SINGH Aged 38 yrs. Son of Sri Raghuvir Singh , Resident of Barna Police Station House Zilagarh (Bihar) Presently Residing at Near Chhawni Elite Dhararmshala , Police Station House Chhawani Bhilai , District Durg Chhattisgarh. 2 HEMANT KUMAR SONI Son of late Sri J. K. Soni Resident of a House MIG 169 Vaishali Nagar, Bhilai , District Durg Chhattisgarh. 3 NATIONALINSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED , Branch No. I , Bhutani Complex , G.E. Road , Power House Bhilai , District Durg Chhattisgarh . APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLE ACT 1988. H!GH COURT OF CHHATnSGARH AT BILASPUR Applicant/ Appellant Misc. Appeal ?C') No. 1032 OF 2009 G. Venkat Rao & Another Respondent Versus Vinay Singh & Others APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT. (SB: Hon'bte Mr. N.K. Aaarwal. J.) Present Shri SP Sahu, Advocates for appellants. ShriGautam Khetrapal, Advocate for respondent No. 3. ORAL ORDER 1. 2. 3. Fr^ (Passed on 12'" day ofjanuary, 2010) Thisis claimants appeal for enhancement of compensation against the award dated 20.02.2009, passed by the IXth Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (FTC), Raipur (for short 'Tribunal') in claim case No. 85/08. The brief facts of the case are that, on 24.07.2008, while the appellant No. 1 alongwith his wife Smt. H^vita Rao, was going on his motorcycle bearing registration No. CG-04-CC-2710; met with an accident with Tanker bearing registration No. CG-07-C-0703, due to which the wife of appellant No. 1 namely Smt. Kavita Rao died on the spot. The claimants, i.e. unfortunate husband and minor son, by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act (for short 'Act,1988') against the Driver/Owner and Insurer of the said Tanker, claimed Rs.20,60,000/- as compensation for death of deceased in the said accident. % 8. The respondent No. 1 & 2 remainaj exparte before the Tribunal. The claim was contested by the respondent No. 3/lnsurance Company. The Tribunal, on a close scrutiny of evidence led by the parties and the material available on record, held the Driver of the said vehicle responsible for the said accident; the vehicle was insured at the time of accldent; assessed the income of deceased at Rs. 3000/- per month; after deducting 1/3 of it towards person expenses of the deceased assessed the loss of yearly dependency at Rs. 24,000/-; looking to the age of deceased at the time of accident as 23 years, applied multiplier of 17, and thus awarded Rs. 4,08,000/- towards loss of dependency. The Tribunal further awarded a sum of Rs. 4000/- towards other Heads and thus awarded a total sum of Rs. 4,12,000/- alongwith interest @ 7.5 percent per annum from the date of apptlcation till its payment. The only submission made by Shri Sahu, leamed counsel appearing for the appellants is that the Tribunal has erred in awarding Rs. 2000/- for funeral expenses and Rs. 20001- for loss of consortium. He further submits that the Tribunal has not awarded anything for loss of estate and the award deserves to be enhanced/modified. Per contra, Shri Khetrapal, leamed counsel appearing for respondent No. 3 supported the award and submitted that the award is well reasoned and deserves to be upheld. 1 have heard the counsel appearing for the parties and also perused the record and order impugned. ^ 9. Undisputedly, the appellant No. 1 i.e. husband of deceased is young person, therefore, the amount awarded on account of loss of consortium is certainly on lower side. It is also not in dlspute that nothing has been awarded on the Head loss of estate. Therefore, in the considered opinion ofthis court, the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal ts required to be recomputed/modified. 10. After having considered the totality of the circumstances of the case, in the considered opinion of this court, the appellants are entitled for a further sum of Rs. 8000/- on the Head of loss of consortium and Rs. 5000/- on the Head of loss of estate, and thus entitled for further amount of Rs. 13,000/- on the other Heads. 11. In the results, the appeal is allowed in part. The appellants are entitled for a further sum of Rs. 13,000/- in additton to the amount already awarded by the Tribunal alongwith interest as awarded by the Tribunal from the date of application. The respondent No. 3/insurance company is dfrected to pay the same withina period of three months form today. Sd/- N.K.AgarwaI Judge j'i 1!1