A--/=^ZS- ^^C^S^SjO^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BIUMSnJR ulVISIQN BENa-j Coram : HON'BLESHRI RAJEEVGUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRI SUN1L KUMAR SINHA, J. M.A.(C)No.1387of2008 APPELLANTS/ CLAIMANTS 1. Pramod Cherwa, aged about 42 years, S/o Shanker Cherwa, 2. Smt. Ramvati, W/o. Pramod Cherwa, aged about 37 years, 3. Sunil, S/o Pramod Cherwa, aged about 16 years, 4. Anand Kumari, D/o Pramod Cherwa, aged about 14 years No. 3 & 4are Minors, through Natural Guardian father Pramod Cherwa, Versus RESPONDENTS/ Owner Driver 1. 2. All R/o Village Sonhat, P.S. Sonhat, Distt. Korea(C.G.) Amit Sharma, S/o Balmukund Sharma, aged about 30 years, R/o Village Bhaiyathan, Tahsit Surajpur, Distt. Sarguja (C.G.) Shatrughan Lal, S/o Sewaram, aged about 29 years, R/o Village Singhore, P.S. Sonhat, Distt. Korea (C.G.) Insurer 3. Branch Manager, The New India Insurance Company Limited, Branch Office, Raigarh (C.G.) Miscellaneous Appeal U/S 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Present: Shri D.N. Prajapatl, learned counsel for the appellants. ORDER (21st October.2008i n fy-.: 2 The foltowing order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J.: Learned counsel for the appellants is heard on admission. 2. This is claimants' appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Korea, District-Baikunthpur (for short 'the Tribunai') vide award dated 18.09.2008, passed in Motor Claim Case No.40/2006. 3. The claimants, unfortunate parents, brother and sister of deceased Santosh clalmed compensation of Rs.30,24,000/- by fiting a ctaim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehteles Act for his death in the motor accident on 19-12-2005 when the Tractor in which he was travelling was dashed by the offending vehicle Tata Spacio bearing registration No.C.G.-04/T/0797, resulttng in his instantaneous death on the spot itself. The claimants further pleaded that deceased Santosh was aged about 18 years and used to eam Rs.6,000/- per month as Carpenter. 4. The Tribunal on a close scrutinyof the evidence led by the parties held that deceased Santosh died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 19.12.2005; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending yehicle Tata Spacio; as the offending vehicle Tata Spacio on the date of the accldent was insured wth the New Indta Insurance Company Limited, the Insurance Company was tiable to pay compensation to the claimants. 5. The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.150/- per day, Rs.4,500/- per month and Rs.54,000/- per annum. By deducting 2/3rd of Rs.54,000/- tovrards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.18,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.18,000/- with the multiplier of 10, the compensatton was worked out to Rs.1,80,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.14,500/- under other heads, the Tribungl awarded a total sum of Rs.1 ,94,500/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Santosh in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest @ 7% per annum on the above amount of compensation of Rs.1,94,500/-, from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6. Shri D.N. Prajapati, learned counset for the appellants vehemently argued that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased and in assessing his income at Rs.4,500/- per month only; in deducting 2/3rt of the income of the deceased towards hss ?»rsona!expenses as against the usual 1/3 as prescribed in the Second Scheduie under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act; in setecting the lower multiplier of 10; and in.awarding low compensatlon of Rs.1,94,500/- only. 7. True; the claimants pieaded that deceased Santosh used to earn Rs.6,000/- per month as Carpenter, but the evidence led In that behalf was not of clinching nature. Considering that the deceased was a boy aged about 18 years only, we do not find any fautt in the assessment of the income of the deceased by the Tribunal at Rs.150/- per day, Rs.4,500/- per month and Rs.54,000/- per annum. 8. The assessment of the claimants' dependency at Rs.18,000/- per annum by the Tribunal by deducting 2/3ro of the income of the deceased towards his personai expenses also cannot be found fault with, in view of the dictum of the Apex in the case of Donat Louis Machado & ors. Vs. L. Ravindra and others, reported in 2000 (1) T.A.C. -208 9. The multiplier of 10 seiected by the Tribunal also does not suffer from any infirmity in view ofthe dtetum oftheApex Court in the case of Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay Vs. Laxman iyer & another, reported in (2003) 8 SCC 731, wherein it was held that in those cases where the claimants are parents of the deceased, the multiplier should never exceed 10. 10. We, therefore, do not find any scope for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal either on account of the assessment of the income of the deceased or the claimants' dependency by the Tribunal or the multipHer selected. 11. The appeal filed by the claimants for enhancement of the compensation, therefore, is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed summarily. Sd/- Chief Justice SA/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge subbu