- ' HIGH COURT OFCHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR GORAM: ADDellants C!aimants DIVISION BENCH HQN'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. HON'BLE SHRSRANGNATH CHANDRAKAR,J Misc^DDealNo.2360f 2004 1 Ashofc Kumar Bhagat, S/o Late Janak aged 25 years by castc Qraon, resident of Bag Bahar, District Jashpur Nagar At present residing at Beladula Raigarh 2 Kumari Geeta Bhagat, D/o Late Janak, aged sboyt 21 yeare, by caste Oraon, occupatipn student r/o Beladula R@garh(CG) VERSUS Respondents :~f i;.,; 1 Vjiay Ekka, S/o Jakharius Ekka, driver, aged 32 years; r/o Viilage Dumartoii, Jashpur Nagar Thana Jashpyr Nagar (Driver) 2 Preetpal Singh, S/o Harvansh Singh, aged 42 years, Gceupation yehicle owner, resident of vitlage Pathalgaon, Distrk;{JashpurNagar(CG) (Qwner) 3. The New India Insurance Company Limited, Transport Nagar, korba (CG) W3! (Insurance Company) MiScellaneousADDealunderSection 173 of iVioterVehieieAct Present : .ShriAwadhTripathiancl.ShriAbhishekSaraf forthe appeliants. counsel •^ r None for respondent No.l though served. Shri Sanjay Agrawal, counsel for respondent No.2. Shri Shivendu Pandya, counsel forrespondent No.3. ORDER ISt {31sl Augusf, 2Q10) The foilowing order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta.C.J. This is claimants' appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Thlrd Additional Motor Accldent Claims Tribunal, Raigarh (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 29.08.2003, passed in Claim Case No.40/2002. 2) As against the compensation of 80,50,OOQ/- claimed by the appeilants/claimahts, unfortunate son and daughter of deceased Janakram by filing a claim petition under Seetion 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident pn 14.01.2000, the Tribunal awarded a toital sum of Rs.1,52,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of the ffling of the claim petitlon till the date ofactual payment. 3) The Tribunat on aclose scrutinyofthe entire evidence led before it held that deceased Janakram died on account of the Iniuries susfained by hlm in the motor accident on 14.01.2000; the •-••/'.'•' .''• ' '•'•'' ..'•'.•"..':••'•:'••"'-\ . •''..'. . :.";, aGcident occurred due tarash and negiigent driving of ttie driver of the offending vehicle Bus bearing reglstratlon No.MP-27 the offendina vehicle Bus on the date ofthe accldent was Ihsured \mth the New India Insurance Company Limitect,thel G8mj3anvwasliabletopavcomDensationtothec1aimants <: _^I B/0511;as nsurance 1 1 ^.ff'- 4) As the respondents have not flled any appeai against the award, the above findings recorded by the Tribunai have now attained finality. 5) The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- perannum.By deducting 1/3''° of Rs.15,000/- towards the peFsona!expensesofthedeeeased,theclaimants'dependency wasassessedat Rs.10,000/- perannum. By muitiplyingthe annual dependency of Rs.10,QOO/- with the multiplier of 15, the compensation was worked outtoRs.1,50,000 /-. By awarding further sum of Rs.2,000/- towards funeral expenses, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,52,000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Janakram In the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.1,52,000/- @ 9% perannum from the date of the filing of the clalm petition tilt the date of actua! payment. 6) Shri Awadh Tripathi and Shri Abhishek Saraf, learned counsel for the appellantssubmitted that the Tribunal has erred in awarding low compensation of Rs.1,52,000/- only, though appellant/ / claimant No.2 Kumari Geeta Bhagat, the unmarried daughter/jf deceased was wholly dependent on the deceased. 7) Shri.Shivendu Parx^a, learned Counsei for respondent No.3 the New llndia Insurance Company Limited, on the other hand supportedi the award and contended that the eompensation of Rs.1,52,000/-, awarded by the Tribunal is ijusf and proper compensation in the faets and circumstances of the present case. '^S.Y. -?,1;-^;^ :fe^^.. ^ 4 \'*'•*-.. ^•^ 8) Shri Sanjay Agrawal, learned counsel for respondent No.2 Preetpal Singh,the owner ofthe offending vehicle also supported the award. 9) In a motor accident claim case what is important Is that the compensation to be awarded by the Courts / Tribunals should be just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the case. It should neither be a meager amount of compensation, nor abonanza. 10) Deceased Janakram was aged about 50 years on the date of the accldent. The claimants pleaded that the deceased owned 17 hectares of agricultural land andwaseamingRs.1,80.000/- per annum. Though appellant / ciaimant No.1 Ashok Kumar Bhagat is major son of deceased Janakram aged about 25 years and must be havlng his own independent IncQme, appellant/clalmant No.2 Kumari Geeta Bhagat is unmarned daughter ofthe deceased and was whotly dependent on the deceased. There Is not even an iota ofevidence that she had any income of herown. 11) The compensation of Rs.1,52,000/- awarded by the Tribunal when examined in the context of the above mentloned broad features ofthecase, Is certainly on the lower side and deserves to be enhanfced to some extent. :•'• / "" •" • ' . . • .' •• . .; . .. ' . ' " ' • . ' .... 12) Consldering all thejelevant aspects of the matter, we are of the opinion that further award of Rs.25,000/- inclusive| pfinterest component on the enhanced amountof compensation would make the compensation of Rs.1,52,000/- awarded by the Tribunal as just •<-.!. Y and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 13) The appeal filed by the appellants/claimants for enhancement ofthe cqmpensation, therefore, is-aliowed in part. The claimants are awarded further sumofRs.25,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of eompensation In addition to the sum of Rs.1,52,OQO/-awarded by the Trihunal. 14) Respondent No.3 the New indla ihsurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.25,000/-beforetheeoncemingClaimsTribunal. 15) No orderastocosts. Sd/- CStlefJustice II • Sd/- R.N.Chandrakar Judge padma