4. The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Raigarh. Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 198$ Present 1 : Shri G.K. Beriwal, learned counsel for the appellants. None for respondents No. 1 and 3. i Shri Prashant Jayaswal, learned Senior Counsel with i i Shri Shailendra Sharma, learned counsel for l respondent No.2. l l L Shri Abhishek Sinha, learned counsel for respondent No.4. \‘ ORDER (26m August, 2009) a The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, c.J. : This is ciaimants' appeal for enhanoement of the compensation awarded by the Additional Motor Accidents Claims iTribunal, Sakti, District Bilaspur (for short, ‘the Tribund‘) vide i i i i i i2) As against the-compensation of Rs.12,95,0001- claimed by i the appellants/ claimants, unfortunate widow; minor children and i parents of deceased Omnarayan by filing a claim petition uMer isection 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, the Tribunal awarded a total rsum of Rs.94;000l- as compensation along with interest g 8% per iannum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of i taotual payment. 13) Shri G.K.‘ Beriwal, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in selecting the tower imultiplier of 10 and in awarding low compensation of Rs.94,000l— award dated 03.05.2002, passed in Claim Case No.16l2000. r warm 4}) Shri Prashant Jayaswal leamed Seniar Counsel for respondent NO 2 the New India Insurance Company Limited on ‘the other hand supported the award and contended that the éomnensatuon of Rs 94 000/- awarded by the Tnbunal Is just and groper compensatuon In the facts and circumstances of the \ ‘ . present case. s Shn Abhlshek Smha leamed counsel for respondent No4 the Onental Insurance Company Limited also supported the award ‘ 6)‘ The claimants pleaded that deceased Omnarayan used to earn RS1 OGOI- per month as Panchayat Secretary The Tnbunal accepting the claimants evidence about the Income of the deceased assessed hrs Income at Rs1 OOOI- per month and RsJ 12 OOOI- per annum 7)‘ On due consideration, we do not find any infirmity in the assessment of the income of the deceased by the Tribunal. 8)l The Tribunal has’assessed the claimants’ dependency at Rs.700/- per month and Rs.8,400/- per annum by deducting Rs.300/- per month toWards the personal expenses of the deceased. ln our opinion, the claimants’ dependency has been _ rightly assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.700l- per month and Rst8,4_00/— per annum. 9) The multiptier of 10 setected by the Tribunal, in View of the recént dictum of the Apex Court in Sarta Verma (Smt) and Gthers Vs Delhi Transport Corporation and Another reported in (200$) 6 scc 121 is certainly on the lower Side. As deceased l L l ’1‘ \ < v Orénnarayan was aged about 40 years on the date of the ac6ident arid his widow appeHant No.1 Lalita Bai was shown to be 35 yearsw { . of§age in the claim petition, the appropriate muitiplier in view of the diofum of the Apex Court in the oase of Sarla Vanna (Smt) and Otthers Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another (supra) would be 15. i 10%)u *By multipiying the annual dependency of Re.8,400/- with the mUitipiier of 15 the compensation would work out to Rs.1 ,26,000/-. By adding further sum of Rs.10,000/- awarded by the Tribunai under other heads, the claimants’ become entitied to receive a totat sum of Rs.1 ,36,000/—. 11) Learned counsel for the parties submitted that with a view to avoid any possible dispute between the parties about the period l fdr which the appellants/ claimants are entitled to receive interest oh the enhanced amount of compensation, the amount of interest l oin the enhanced amount of compensation may be quantified in this appeal itself. 12) The accident in the present case wherein the deceased lost his life took place in the year 2000; the claimants tiled the claim l pietition in-the year 2000; the impugned award came to be passed bfy the Tribunal in the year 2002; the present appeal for enhancement of the compensation was filed by the appellants/ claimants in the year 2002; and the appeal is being finally decided in the year 2009. Considering all the relevant factors including the delay in disposal of the claim petition and the present appeal and the fact that the insurer of the offending vehicle Le. j yespondent No.2 the New India insurance Company Limited is not to be blamed for the entire delay in the matter, we quavitify the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of r Rs.42,000/- i at Rs.9,000/-. 1,13) For the foregoing reasons, the appeai fiie by the appeiiants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation is atlowed in part. The compensation of Rs‘94,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.1,36:000/- with further quantified amount of interest of Rs.9,000/— on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.42;000/-. ,14) Respondent No.2 the New india insurance Company Limited is granted three months’ time for depositing the total sum of Rs.51,0001- (Rs.42,000l- towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.9,000/— towards the quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.42,000/—) before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 11 5) No order as to costs. $57 /e» S6 ‘ ,r 5d]- CHIEF JUSTICE d