@ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DlVlS!0N BENCH CGRRM: HOWELE SHRI MJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON’BLE $HR! RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR,‘ J. MA. N0. 321 of 2mm 1 Smt. Laxmi Bai, W/o Chandu Lal Yadav, aged about 35 years, 2 Jai Singh, S/o Chandu Lal Yadav, aged about 22 years, 3 Ku. Sangeeta Bai, d/o Chandu La! Yadav, aged about 20 years, 4 Kamieshwar, S/o Chandu La! Yadav, aged about 4 years, 5 Ku. Savita, D/o Chandu Lal aged about 1 7 years, ' Anneliants Apvaicants 6 Ku. Manisha, D/o Chandulal aged about 2 and hal year No. 4 to 6 minor, through natural guardian mather Laxmr Bar Yadav, \_ All R/o. Village Kalewa, P.S. Ghumka, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) VERSUS Resgondents Jagtar Slngh, S/o Mehar Slngh aged Nan-applicants about 32 years, Rlo 106 B.T. Road, Kolkata 35, (we) New lndla lnsuganoe Co. Ltd. 140/ D;B.T. Road, Kolkata. Misc: Aggeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act a Present : Shri Akhiiesh Kumar,.counsel for the appellants. None for respondent No.1. Shri Shree Kumar Agrawal, Senior Counsel with Shrl Anand Gupta, counsel for respondent No.2, ORDER (Th september, 2010) The foHawing order of the Court was passed 5y Rageev Gupta, C.J. This is ciaimants' appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by First Additional Motor Accident Ciaims Tribunal, Rajnandgaon (for short ‘the Tribunal’) vide award dated 29.11 .2003; passed in claim case No.21 6/2002. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.8,40,000i- claimed by the appellants] ciaimants, unfortunate widow and children of deceased Chandulai Yadav by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehlcies Act, which later on was converted into one under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 02.01.2002, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1 ,99,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of tiling of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 3) The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it heid that deceased Chanduial Yadav died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the” motor accident on 02.01.2002; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Truck bearing registration No.W.B.—23l8303; as the above offending vehicle Truck, on the date of the accident was insured with the New a India insurance Company Limited, th'e insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimants. 4) As the respondents have not filed any appeai against the award} the above findings recorded by the Tribuna! have now attained finality. 5) The Tribunai assessed the income of the deceased at Rs‘2,000/— per month and Rs.24.,000/— per annum. By deducting 1/3“ of Rs.24,000;’- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the ciaimants’ dependency was assessed at Rsi 6,000J— per annum. By muitiplying the annuai dependency of Rs.16,000/— with the muttiplier of 13, the compensation was ~worked out to Rs.’l,92,0DO/~ (there appears to be some arithmetical mistake as the amount of Rs.16,000/- when multipiied by 13, would come to Rs.2,08,000/-). .The Tribunal further awarded Rs.5;000/— towards loss of consortium to the widow and Rs.2,000l— towards funeral expenses. The Tribunal, thus, awarded a total sum of Rs.1 ,99,000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Chandulal Yadav in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation} of Rs.1,99,000/— @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actuai payment. 6) . Shri Akhilesh Kumar, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the .claimants’ evidence about the income of the deceased and in //~*< assessing his income at Rs.2,000/- per month and Rs.24,000/- per annum only; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.1 ‘99i000/- oniy. 7) Shri Shree Kumar Agrawai, learned Senior Counsei with Shri Anand Gupta, Iearned counsel for respondent No.2 the New indie insurance Company Limited, on the other hand, supported ihe award and contended that as the olaimants couid not estabiish the income of the deceased as pleaded by them, the compensation of Rs.1,99,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case 8) . in a motor accident claim case, what is important is that, the compensation to be awarded by the Courtsffribunals should be just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the case. it should neither be a meager amount of compensation, nor a Bonanza. 9) Now we. snail examine as to, whether the compensation of Rs.1,99,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 10) True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Chandulal Yadav used to earn Rs.100l- per day as Coolie at the Railway Station at Raipur, the evidence led in that behalf was not of clinching nature. We, therefore, do not find any fault in the approach of the Tribunai in discarding the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased. “ H) Nevertheless, the income of the deseased assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.2,000/— per month and Rs.24,000!- per annum is somewhat on the iower side and requires reconsideration. 12) Considering that deceased Chandulai ‘Yadav wastaged about 45 years on the date of the accident and the unfortunate accident wherein deceased Chandulai Yadav lost his life took place in the year 2002, we are of the opinion that the deceased oould have easily earned Rs.2,500/~ per month and Rs.30;000/- per annum even working as an un~skilled labour. We, therefore, prepose to recompute the compensation taking the income of the deceased at Rs.2,500/- per month and Rs.30,000/- per annum. 13} By deducting the usual 1/3” of Rs.30,000/— towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants’ dependency is assessed at Rs.20,000l~ per annum. 14) Considering the age of the deceased, his widow and their children, we are of the opinion that multiplier of 13 selected by the Tribunal is appropriate in the present case. 15) By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.20,000/— with the multiplier of 13, the compensation works out to Rs.2,60,000/'—. The claimants are further entitled to receive a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses; Rs.5,GOO/— for loss of estate; and Rs.5.000/— for loss of consortium to the widow. The claimants, thus, become entitled to receive a total sum of Rs.2,75,000/— as D z:—x..,,H A M, r ‘ \ I compensation for the death of deceased Chandulal Yadav in the motor accident. 16) Learned counsel for the parties submitted that with a View to avoid any poseibie dispute between the parties about the period for which the claimants are entitled to receive interest on the enhanced amount of compensation, the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation may be quantified in this appeal itself. 17) Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, including the delay in disposal of the claim petition and the present appeal and the tact that insurance Company alone is not to’ be blamed for the entire delay in the matter; we quantify the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.76,000/— at Rs.9,000/— 18) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal tiled by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation is aliowed in part. The compensation of Rs.1,99,000/— awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.2,75,000f— with further quantified amount of interest of Rs.9,000/— on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.76,000/-. \"‘§t\ 19) Respondent No.2 The New lndia insurance gompany Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.85,QOD/— (Rs.7’6,000/— towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.9,000f— towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.76,000/—) before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 20) No order as to caste. W‘ ‘ x J, Sdl— K {:sruobu Chief Justicf Q"§\ wf ~