y HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH (%O Appellants Claimants Respondents Non-claimants CORAM: HON’BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON’BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J. Misc. Appeal (C) No. 1350 of 2009 1. Smt. Padma Bai Diwah, w/o late Ramayan Lal Diwan, aged about 30 years, occupation House wife. 2. Ku. Gomati Diwan, d/o late Ramayan Lal Diwan, aged about 14 years, occupation student. 3. Ku. Sunita Diwan, d/o Iate Ramayan Lal Diwan, aged about 1O years, occupation student. 4. Ku. indumati Diwan, d/o late Ramayan Lal Diwan, aged about 08 years, occupation student. 5. Devendra Kumar Diwan, s/o late Ramayan Lal Diwan, aged about O6 years, occupation student. 6. Chandrahas Kumar Diwan, s/o late Ramayan Lal Diwan, aged about 04 years, occupation student. (Appellant No. 2 to 6 being minor on behalf of through their legal guardian mother appellant No.1 Smt. Padma Bai Diwan) 7. Smt. Shukmat Bai Diwan, w/o late Jai Singh Diwan, aged about 60 years, occupation Nothing. All r/o Village Dheba, Police Station Kashdol, district Raipur C.G. VERSUS 1. Anil Kumar Chauhan, s/o Shipahi Chauhan, aged about 25 years, 445- occupation Truck Driver, R/o M.S. Service Station, Chokra Nala, Telibandha, Raipur, district Raipur C.G. (Driver of vehicle Truck bearing registration No. C.G.04/G-3858) Jai Bhagwan Sharma s/o J.D. Sharma, aged about 45 years, occupation vehicie owner, r/o M.H. 16, Apartment Shukla Farm House, Telibandha, Raipur, district Raipur C.G. (Owner of vehicle Truck bearing registration No. C.G.04/G-3858) The Oriental insurance Company Limited, through Divisional Manager, Divisional Office, Kutchery Chowk, Jail Road, Raipur, district Raipur C.G. (insurer of vehicle Truck bearing registration No. C.G.04/G-3858) Misc. Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act. Present: Shri Shivendu Pandya, counsel for the appellants. Shri Sudhir Agrawal and Shri P. Dutta, counsel for respondent No.3. The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. This is claimants’ appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mahasamund (for short ‘the Tribunal’) vide award dated 06.02.2009, passed in Claim Case No.31l2008. ORDER (13m Jury, 2011) Cm 2) As against the compensation of Rs.22,00,000/— claimed by the appellants/ claimants, unfortunate widow, minor children and mother of deceased Ramayan Lal Diwan; by ming a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 03.12.2007, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.2,98,770/— as compensation along with interest @ 6% 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 held that deceased Ramayan Lal Diwan died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 03.12.2007; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Truck bearing registration No‘C.G.-04G/3858; as the above offending vehicte Truck on the date of the accident was insured with the Oriental Insurance Company Limited and the insurance Company could not establish any breach of the policy conditions, the lnsurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimants. 4) As the respondents have not med any appeal against the award, the above findings recorded by the Tribunal have now attained 0nality. 5) The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.100/- per day; Rs.3,000/— per month; and Rs.36,000/— per annum. By deducting 1/3“ of Rs.36,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants’ dependency was assessed at Rs.24,000/— per annum. By multiplying the annual ( q“ ,, dependency of Rs.24,000/— with the multiplier of 12, the compensation was worked out to Rs.2,88,000/~. By awarding further sum of Rs.2,000/— towards funeral expenses; Rs.2,000/— for loss of consortium to the widow; and Rs.6,770/— towards medical expenses, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.2,98,770/— as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Ramayan Lal Diwan in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.2,98,770/— @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition tilt the date of actual payment. 6) Shri Shivendu Pandya, 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.100/— per day; Rs.3,000/— per month; and Rs.36,000/— per annum only; in deducting 1/3” of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses; in selecting the lower multiplier of 12; in awarding low sum of Rst2,000/- each towards funeral expenses and loss of consortium to the widow; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.2,98,770/— only. 7) Shri Sudhir Agrawal and Shri P. Dutta, learned counsel for respondent No.3, the Oriental Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Truck, on the other hand, supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.2,98,770/~ awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 8) In a motor acciden’t claim case, what is important is that, the compensation to be awarded by the Courts/Tribunals shouid 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 shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.2,98,770/- awarded by the Tribunai is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 10) True, the claimants pieaded that deceased Ramayan Lal Diwan used to earn Rs.250—300/— per day as Carpenter, no cogent and reliable evidence was ted before the Tribunal for establishing the income of the deceased to the extent of RS250- 300/— per day. Even othenivise, it has come in the evidence that the deceased was working as a Carpenter in a small village Dheba. We, therefore, do not hnd any infirmity in the assessment of the income of the deceased by the Tribunal at Rs.100/- per day; Rs.3,000/— per month; and Rs.36,000/— per annum. 11) The deduction of 1/3“ of the income of the deceased by the Tribunal towards the personal expenses of the deceased considering that there are as many as seven claimants in the case, who all were wholly dependent on the income of the deceased, requires reconsideration. 12) ln our considered opinion, the deduction of 1/4‘“ of the income of the deceased would be just and proper in the present case. We, therefore, assess the claimants’ dependency at r2 \l Rs.27,000/— per annum by deducting 1/4m of Rs.36,000l~ towards the personal expenses of the deceased. 13) The muitiplier of 12 selected by the Tribunal is also on the lower side and requires reconsideration. 14) Deceased Ramayan Lal Diwan was shown to be 32 years of age in his postmortem report and his widow Smt. Padma Bai Diwan was shown to be 3O years of age in the claim petition. ln our opinion, multiplier of 16 would be appropriate in the present case in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt) and Others Versus Delhi Transport Corporation and another, reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121 wherein multiplier of 16 has been prescribed for the age group between 31-35 years. 15) By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.27,000/— with the multiplier of 16 the compensation works out to Rs.4,32,000/—. The claimants are further entitled to receive Rs.5,000/— towards funeral expenses; Rs.5,000I- for loss of estate and Rs.5,000/- for loss of consortium to the widow. By adding further sum of Rs.6,770/— awarded by the Tribunal towards medical expenses, the claimants become entitled to receive a total sum of Rs.4,53,770/— as compensation for the death of deceased Ramayan Lal Diwan in the motor accident. 16) Learned counsel for the parties submitted that with a view to avoid any possible dispute between the parties before the Tribunal 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 reievant as‘pects of the matter, including the delay in disposai of the ciaim petition, and the present appeal and the fact that the insurance Company atone is not to be btamed for the entire delay in the matter, we quantify the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.1,55,000/— at Rs.15,000/-. 18) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal tiled by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs.2,98,770/— awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.4,53,770/— with further quantified amount of interest of Rs.15,000l— on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.1 ,55,000/~. subbu 19) Respondent No.3 the Oriental insurance Company Limited is granted three months’ time for depositing the total sum of Rs.1,70',000/- iRs.1,55,000/- towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.15,000/- towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.1,55,000/—) before the 20) No order as to costs. ’ i Sd/- Sd/— i Rangnath Chandrakar