^ IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M.A.(QNo. /3F /2010 Itogte'SBai'cff APPELLANTS 1] Rajesh Kumar Gupta., S/o. Ramakant ^ ^' ^^ ^ ...*' ^- ^ ...(Owner ofbus bearins resistration no. C.G 15/A-6990) ^ Respondent no. 3 & 2 /' Gupta, aged about 30 years, R/o. Village Namnakala, Ring Road, v t^ Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) ^•;:A^71r >..-",.'S^ ^J^ 2] Jaiprakash Patel, S/o. Devbihari Patel, aged about 25 years, R/o. Village Revti, Police Station Chandaura, Tahsil Pratappur, District Surguja (C.G.) . ^(Driyerofbu^bearing registration no^ C.GJ5/A-6990) /. V^RSUS RESPONDENTS Claimants 1] Devkumar, S/o. Amarsai^ aged about 30 years, ^ ,2] 31 A // 4] Ku. Mayawati, D/o. Devkumar, aged about 7 years, Laljit, S/o. Devkumar, aged about 4 years, Respondent no.2 & 3 are minors, through their natural guardian/father Devkumar, S/o. Amarsai, aged about 30 years, All above are R/o. Village Kundpan, Post Salwahi, Police Station Sanawal, District Surguja (C.G.) United India Company Limited, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) ...(Insurer ofbus bearingregistrqtiQn^nQ. C.G 15/A-6990) Respondent/responclent no.l w^' APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLE ACT V'' Claim in tribunal at Rs. 19,48,000/- Amount awarded Rs. 2,33,500^- Claim in appeal Rs. 2,33,5007-/- h^"^ -^.' APPELLANTS Respondent No.3 & 2 RESPONDENTS Claimants HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR Misc. Appeal (C) No. 135 of2010 Rajesh Kumar Gupta and another VERSUS Devkumar and others APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTQR VEHICLES ACT S.B.: HON'BLE SHRI N.K.AGARWAL. J. Present: Shri Manoj Paranjpe with Shri Vikram • Dixit, counsel for the appellant. Shri Jitendra Shrivastava, counsel for respondents No. 1 to 3. Shri Dashrath Gupta, counsel for respondent No.4. ORAL ORDER (Passedon 16.08.2011) This is appeal preferred by the owner and driver of the offending vehicle Bus bearing registration No.C.G.15A 6990 against the award dated 20th January, 2010 passed by the Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (F.T.C.), Pratappur, Dist. Surguja in claim.case No. 29/2008. 2. As against compensation of Rs.19,48,000/- claimed by the unfortunate husband and minor children of deceased ~ Jero Bai, aged about 27 years in the accident dated 01.06.2008, the learned Tribunal has awarded a total sum ofRs.2,33,500/- exonerating the insurance company from its liability to pay compensation. 3. The learned Tribunal, on a close scrutiny oT the evidence led before it, held: the accident had occurred due to rash and negligent ^,^^^ ..^"^..^ "'^ /6^^\ § 'WS&ik 1 '^sy driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Bus; exonerated the insurance company from its liability to pay compensation holding the respondent/insurance company has successfully proved its defence; assessed the income of the deceased as Rs.1500/- per month and Rs.18,000/- per annum; after deducting one-third towards personal and living expenses of the deceased, yearly loss of dependency was assessed at Rs.12,000/-; by applying multiplier of 18, the learned Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.2,16,000/- on account of loss of dependency; by adding award ofRs.17,500/- (Rs.5000/- for funeral expenses, Rs.5000/- for loss of consortium, Rs.5000/~ for loss of love and affection and Rs.2500/- for loss of estate) under the other permissible heads, the Tribunal, thus, worked out total sum ofRs.2,33,500/- 4 . The only submission of Shri Manoj Paranjpe, learned counsel with Shri Vikram Dixit for the appellants, is: the accident had occurred due to negligence of deceased herself, and therefore, the learned Tribunal has erred in fastening liability to pay compensation upon the appellants. No other points have been raised. 5. On the other hand, Shri Jitendra Shrivastava, learned counsel for respondents No. 1 to 3 and Shri Dashrath Gupta, learned counsel for respondent No.4 supported the award impugned and would submit: in the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal has rightly awarded the compensation of Rs.2,33,500/- in favour -of the claimants for the death of Smt. Jero Bai. I 1 •^.^ J 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the Tribunal including award impugned. 7. A bare perusal of criminal case papers i.e. F.I.R., charge sheet and final report filed in this case and the paragraph 3 of written statement of the appellants, it would reveal that the deceased was at the extreme left of the road at the time of accident and despite that she has been dashed by the offending vehicle Bus. If the driver of the offending vehicle Bus was blowing horn and was running the offending vehicle slowly, then the Bus could have been stopped before dashing Smt. Jero Bai. The written statement filed by the appellants is also suggestive of the fact that the Bus was being driven at an excessive speed and the driver could not control the same, therefore, he dashed Smt. Jero Bai. 8. Considering the pleadings of the parties and evidence adduced in the case, in the considered opinion of this Court, the learned Tribunal has not committed any illegality in holding the driver of the offending vehicle Bus guilty of negligence in the said accident. .9. In view of above, I do not find any substance in the appeal preferred by the owner and driver. 10. Accordingly, the appeal, being devoid of merit and substance, is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- N.K. Agarwal Judge t\ { ^of