J“V 3 g; A @ HEGH COUR'E' QF CHHATTI$GARH AT BELASPUR DIViSiON BEN$H CQRAM: H‘§N"BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, Cm}. ' H0N5BLE SHRE SUML KUMAR $ii‘v‘% , 3., M§sc. Appeai Nozw of 2963 1 Smt Padma S Nair, Widow 0f La€e Shri NS Nair, aged about 39 years, by caste Hintiu Nair ,2 Sanaeep S Nair. Slo Late Shri NS Nair, aged 'abaut ‘28 years, by caste Hindu Naér Ku Susmita S r ammo Late Shri NS Nair) aged abbut 1.5 years, by caste Hindu Nair Anaeiiams C$a§man$s Sujit S Nair, Sm Laie Shri NS Nair, aged abcut 9 yeara, by casie Hindu Na ir Ku Soniya S Nair, D10 Late Shri NS Nair, aged abeui 3 years, by caste Hindu Nair {Si No.3 to 5 are minors, through their naturai guardian arid mather Smi Padma S Nair) Aii residents of Cheiur Mam’adu, Paviaeshwaram, Tehaii Katiarkara, Disirisi Loiiam, Keraia At present residing Clo Vasw Engineering Constructions L & 'r' Cement Prerect, Hirmr, Past Hrrmi, Teheii Simga, District Raipur (CG) VER$US m1 'Jaevinder Singh, $/o Ratan Singh aged abut 24 years, $ikh, Occupation Driving, resident of Firozpur, PS and District Firezpur (Punjab) At - present iO/‘ GT Road (ATO) Hawrna, GT Road, 151 Wara‘nagar, District Barenpur, West Bengai esoondents Nan —- appiioants ‘ R i $ Suk‘nbir Singh, Sfo Sardr Haal mgh, Sikh, Occupaéian Truck Owner r/o 1&6 BT Read; Calcutta, 35 West Bengaf United india insurance Company Limited, Through Branch Manager, Uni’ted Insurance Compan Liited; 1 Hrre Skeet, alcutta - 4, Wt Bengai, Registered Office — Unit §ndia Heuse 24, Whites Road Madras, 600 0‘ 4 (amiinadu) MK Bannerjee, Sic JN Benneriee, resideni of Banrjee Coiony, Pipariya Road, Posi Pipariya Distriei Heshangabaci at erent rsidin at MEG 263 (udco) Aamdi Nagar, Ehii, Dietrict Durg (CG} Misc. Apnea! under Section 1m of the Motor Vehicies A...‘ A Hm, $33 Shri Dasarath Gupta, counsei for reeponoient No.3. l i lPreseni i : Shri Bhaskar Pyasi, counsei forfhe appeiian’ts. i i I i r i i i GRDEE (23th $eetembers Zg‘iei The foiiowing order of ihe Court was passeei by iRegeev G‘upta, C.J. This is ciaimanfs‘ appeal for enhancemeni of the i ‘compensation awarded by t’ne First Additional Motor Accident fClaims i Tribunai, Rainendgaon (for short ‘t‘ne Tribunai’) vide award dated 01 .102002, passed in Ciaim Case No.26194. w 2’) : As against the compensation of Rs.58,25,0GOI- oiaimed by the appeiiants/ciaimanfs, unfortunate widow and children of deceased NS'Nair by fiiing a claim petition under Section 168 of the i‘viotor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on a m s y m 6 a C es ed . T ne i se eg H ai l 05(011994, the Tribunai awarded a total sum of Rs.3,7LGOO/— as compensation along with interest @ 12% per annum. H 1 ‘ , 3) The Tribuna! on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence. led be’ore ithetd that deceased NS Nair died on account of the iniuries su tained by him in the motor accident 0n 05.01 .1994; the accident ocfurreo’ due to rash and negiigent driving of the driver of the offending vehicie Truck bearing registration No.WB-23IO471; as the above‘ offending vehioie Truck on the date of the accident was V insured with the United indta Insurance Company Limited and the ineurance Company could not estabiish any breach of the poitcy c nditions, the lneurance Company was liable topay compensation to the ctaimants. - 4)i As the respondents have not filed any appeat against the avfvard, the above findings recorded by the Tribunai have now attained finality. 5)? The Tribunai assessed the income of the‘deceaseci at Rs.36,0001— per annum. By deducting Rs.8,000[— towards the personai expenses of the deceased, the claimants’ dependency i was assessed at Rs.28,000i— per annum. By multipi‘ying the annual dependency of Rs.28,000/- with the muitipiter of 13, the compensation was worked out to Rs.3,64,GOOI—. By awarding f rther sum of Rs.7,000f- under other heads, the Tribunat awarded a total sum of Rs.3,71y000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased NS Nair in the motor accident. The ribunai further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of R3371 ,OOGI- @ 12% per annum from the date of the award iii; the date of actuai payment. ‘6)1 Shri Bhaskar Pyasfa learned oounsef for the appeffents vehementiy argued fhat the Tribunaf has erred in asseseing the f inciome of the deceased at Rs.36,GOS/- per annum onfy; in dedfuoting Rs,8,000/- towards the personaf expenses of the f deoeased, in seieciing the tower muitipiier of f3; and in awarding gvw 7) Shri Dasarath Gupta; teamed oounsei for respondent No3 United indie. insurance Company Limited, on the other hand SU “o R ".3,7‘1,000l- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper cotnpe‘nsation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 8). ’tn a motor accident claim case what is important is that the co‘npe'nsation to be awarded by the Courts I Tribunats shouid be gust and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the ctse. 1t should neither be a meager amount of compensation, nor a honanza. 10) . Now, we shalt examine as to whether the compensation ct Rs.3,7’1,GOO/— awarded by the Tribunai is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 11‘) True, the claimants pleaded that deceased NS Nair used to earn BS.2,00,00D/— per annum from his construction Company, the odiy income Tax Return of the deceased produced before the Ttibu‘nal was for the r' assessment year 1990-91 and the total income of the deceased shown in this Return was Rs.30,000/-. lo compensation of R3331 1000/— only. u; II)___‘_.__N-._ th ported the award and contended that the compensation of J0” __. l r @ i The Tribunai; taking into consideratien the‘future prospects of the business of the deceased,.assessed his income at Rs.36,GDD/- per annum. 12) in this stats vof evidence, we do not find any infirmity in the assessment of the income of the deceased by the Tribunai at Rs.36,000/- per annum. 13) The deduciion’ of Rs.8,000l— by the Tribunai towards the ‘ ‘p‘ersonai expenses of’the deceased is rather on the tower side, as the deduction in that behalf could have been to the extent of Retzoooi-Je 113“ at Rs.36,000/-. 14) Considering that deceased NS Nair was aged about 49 years on the ’ctate of the accident, the mutttpiier of t3 seiected by the Tribunai aieo cannot be found fauit with in View of the recent dictum of‘the Apex Court in the case of Saria Verma (Smi) and others Versus Dethi Transhort Corporation and another reported in {2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases 121‘, 'wherein muitiptier of 13 has been prescribed for the age group between 46-50 years. 15} i i i \ For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any scope for enhancement of the compensation either on account of the assessment of the income of the deceased, or the ciaimantsY dependency by the Tribunal, or the muitiptier selected. the for 16) The appeal filed by appelEants/ctatmants i. r1 I enhancement ofu‘the compensation; therefore, is liabie to be idismissed and is hereby dismissed. / ’/ £17) No order as to‘costs. W ‘ ‘ l l dl— . “ Sma" Sfn‘w i/ i 5‘“ it Chier Justice i ‘ S“"“ age ///\ 3“ / > i i i l ‘i f L