CA"^W' yi^^fii^ H^i 'w IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILAS PUR MISC.APPEAL (C) N0.^" OF 2008 APPELLANTS --Non-Applicants 1. Krishna Tirkey (Uraon) S/o 1 ^ ^y .,^?^ ^\^ ^ .A^ ^'^y'v^\ \^.^ ^s^( /x ^ESPONDENTS Claimants i^' '^ Godhi, aged about 47 years, Agriculturist and Owner of Tractor, R/o Village Bhanaura, Police Station Balrampur, Tahsil Pal, District Surguja C.G. 2^'Krishna Prasad Singh S/o Hari Prasad Singh, aged about 45 years, Tractor Driver, R/o Village Bhanaura, Police Station Balrampur, Tahsil Pal, District Surguja C.G. VERS^JS^ 1 Gurbari Bai widow of late Mansai Cherwa, aged about 45 years, House work, R/o Village Atauri, Police Station Rajpur, Tahsil Pal, District Surguja C.G. -2. Binay Kumari widow of "^ late Ramratan, aged about 21 years, House work, R/o Village Atauri, Police Station Rajpur, Tahsil Pal, District Surguja C.G. ^ '^. ^^^"" MEMO OF APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLEACT,1988 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR CORAM: Hon'bte Shri I.M. Quddusi, J. & Hon'ble Shri Prashant Kumar Mishra. J. M.A. tC} No. 424 of 2008 APPELLANTS Krishna Tirkey (Uraon) and another. Versus RESPONDENTS Gurbari Bai and another. Shri Rajesh Pandey. counsel for the appellants. Shri Pankaj Shrivastava, counset for the respondents. ORAL ORDER (23/03/2011) Following oral order of the Court was passed by I. M. Quddusi. J. This appeal has been filed against the impugned award dated 29/02/2008 passed by the II Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ambikapur (Surguja) in Claim Case No. 48/2007 only on the question of quantum as the vehide was not insured. (2) Brief facts of the case, jn short, as projected by the claimants, are that on 20/05/2007 deceased Ramratan along with other labourers were going from village Atauri to village Dera for bringing cement in tractor bearing registration No. C.G.15-A/2618 with trolley bearing registration No. C.G.15-A/2164 and when they reached near Atauri and Lilauti Ghat, the tractor turned turtte due to rash and negligent driving of the non-applicant No.2/driver and caused the accident. On account of the grievous injuries sustained by the deceased Ramratan, he died on the spot. He used to earn Rs.3,000/- per month by doing agricultural and labour work. The claimants claiming to be dependents of the deceased claimed compensation ofRs.14.50.000/-. (3) The deceased was a tabourer but according to the statement of his widow AW-1 Binkumari sometimes he was not getting engagement and -- -A therefore we assess the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.2.500/- on the basis of 25 working days in a month. The annual incomewould come to Rs. 30.000/- and after deducting 1/3 for personal living expenses remainder would come to 20.000/- per annum. Since age ofthe deceased was 24 years multiplier of 18 would'be applicabte and thus the total loss of dependency comes to Rs.3,60,000/-. Besides this, the widow js entitted to get Rs.5,000/-as loss ofconsortium, mother of the deceased is entitled to get Rs.5,000/- towards loss of love andaffection, Rs.10,000/- for loss of estate and Rs.5,000/- for funeral expenses. Thus, totel towards other heads comes to Rs.25,000/-and afteradding this amounttowards loss of dependency the total compensation comes to Rs.3,85.000/-. therefore the claimants are entitled to get Rs.3,85,000/-. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.4,27,500/- as compensation which js in our opinion excessive and the same is reduced to Rs.3,85,000/-. Besides this. the claimants would be entitled to get 6% simple interest per annum from the date of filing of the daim petition till its payment is made. Penal interest of 12% imposed by the Tribunal is improper and therefore that part is set-aside. Rest of the conditions mentioned in the impugned award shall remain intact. (4) Thus, the appeal is allowed in part accordingly and the award is modified to the above extent. Sd/- LM.Quddusi Judge Sd/- Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge ^^