,<!li)'"~.,.,'"'1!t fl"""^ r^ -s, l^r [.' Claimants HiGH COURTOF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIViSION BENCH Coram : HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, CJ. HON'BLE SHRt R.L. JHANWAR, J. Misc. Appeal No. 727 of 200S 1. Bahur Singh Sahu, S/o Latelu Sahu, aged about 55 years. 2 Khilawan Sahu, S/o Bahur Singh, aged about 28 years. 3. Ku. Neetu Sahu, D/o Bahur Sinah, agedsbout18years. 4. Ku. Santoshi Sahu, D/o Bahur Singh Sahu, aged about 1 6 years. Santosh Sahu, S/o Bahur Singh, aged about 14 years. Minor Appeliants No. 4 & 5 represented by their Natural Guardian and Father Bahur Singh Appeliant No.1 All R/o village Bhilai, Thana Supela district Durg (C.G.) Versys 1. Nand Kumar Janade, S/o Rajaram Jangde (Satnami) aged about 33 years, R/o Barbaj, Thana Arang Present AddressBhawani Nagar, Thana Mandir Hasaud, district Raipur, (C.G.) (Driver ofthe Dumper) 2. Narsingh Agrawal, S/o N.L. Agrawal, R/o Viilage Mandir Hasaud, District Raipur (C.G.) (Owner ofthe Dumper) 3. The National tnsurance Company Limited, Through its Divisional Manager, Divisional Office, G.E. Road, Raipur (C.G.) (Insurer of the Dumper) i:y£@.'.>... cS. '"I. ^;-r':':- MISC. APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MIOTORVEHICLE ACT, 1988 Present: Shri Satyendra Sahu, learned counsel for the appellants. None for respondents No. 1 & 2. Shri Goutam Khetrapai & Shri Rakesh Sahu, learned counsel for respondent No.3 - The National Insurance Company Limited. (O6'h, The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J.: This is claimant's appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Second Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Raipur (for short, 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 29.11.2004, passed in Claim Case No.29/2004. 2) The appellants/ claimants, unfortunate husband and children of deceased Radha Bai Sahu, claimed compensation of Rs.4,85,000/- by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for her death in the motor accident on 14.05.2003, when the Bus bearing registration No. C.G.08- ZA/0164 in which she was travelling was dashed by the offending vehicle Dumper bearing registration No. C.G.04-ZC/7214, resulting in multiple serlous injuries to Radha Bai Sahu who succumbed to those injuries. The claimants further pleaded that deceased Radha Bai Sahu was aged about 50 years and used to earn Rs.100/- per day as Labourer. 3) The owner, driver and insurer of the offending vehicle Dumper contested the claim and denied their liability to pay 'i"S'^,' i-.^^> compensation to the claimants on the plea that the driver of the bus himseif was responsible for the accident. The insurer took the further piea that the driver of the offending vehicle Dumper was not holding a valid driving licence and the Dumper was being plied in breach of the policy conditions. 4) The claimants examined AW1 Bahur Singh, AW2 Ashok Kumar Sahu and AW3 Suresh Kumar Sahu in support of their ciaim, whereas the owner, driver and insurer of the offending vehicle Dumper did not examine any witness in rebuttal. 5) The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the evidence led before it held that deceased Radha Bai Sahu died on account of the injuries sustained by her in the motor accident on 14.05.2003; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Dumper; as the offending vehicle Dumper on fhe date of the accident was insured with the National Insurance Company Limited, the Insurance Company was liabte to pay compensation to the claimants. 6) The Tribunal assessed the income of deceased Radha Bai Sahu at Rs.40/- per day; Rs.1,200/- per month; and Rs.14,400/- per annum. By deducting 1/3 of Rs.14,400/- towards her personal expenses, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.9,600/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.9,600/- with the multiplier of 11, the compensation was worked out to Rs.1,05,600/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.5,000/- towards ioss of consortium to the husband and Rs.2,000/- towards funeral expenses, the Tribunai awarded a total sum of Rs.1,12,600/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Radha Bai Sahu in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.1,12,600/- @ 6% per annum from the date of fiiing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 7) Shri Satyendra Sahu, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in assessing the income of the deceased at Rs.40/- per day; Rs.1,200/- per month; and Rs.14,400/- per annum only; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.1,12,600/-only. 8) Shri Goutam Khetrapal & Shri Rakesh Sahu, learned counset for respondent No.3 The National Insurance Company Limited, on the other hand, supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.1 ,12,600/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case as the claimants could not establish that the deceased had any regular income. 9) The findings recorded by the Tribunal that deceased Radha iai Sahu died on account of the injuries sustained by her in the motor accident on 14.05.2003; the driver of the offending vehicle Dumper was responsible for the accident; and the insurer of the offending vehicle Dumper was liable to pay compensation to the claimants, have now attained finatity as the respondents have not filed any appeal against the award. That apart, there is overwhelming evidence avaiiabie on record to establish the above facts beyond any shadow of doubt. We, therefore, affirm the above findings recorded by the Tribunal. 10) True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Radha Bai Sahu used to earn Rs.1 OO/- per day as Labourer, but the evidence led in that behalf was not of clinching nature. We, therefore, do not find any fault in the approach of the Tribunal in discarding the claimants' evidence about the income ofthe deceased. 11) Nevertheiess, the income of the deceased assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.40/- per day; Rs.1,200/- per month; and Rs.14,400/- per annum is certainly on the lower side and requires reconsideration. 12) Considering that deceased Radha Bai Sahu was an able bodied iady, though aged about 50-55 years, even by working as unskilled labour she could have easily earned Rs.70-80/- per day. We, therefore, assess her income at Rs.2,000/- per month and Rs.24,000/- per annum. 13) By deducting 1/3rd of Rs.24,000/- towards her personal expenses, the claimants' dependency is assessed at Rs.16,000/- per annum. 14) Considering that deceased Radha Bai Sahu was aged about 50-55 years and_her husband Bahur Singh Sahu was aged more than 55 years on the date of the accident, we are of the opinion that the multiplier of 10 would be appropriate in the present case, In view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd Vs Kalpana and others, reported in 2007 ,idi"sSESE&^ "•»», ACJ 82S, wherein the multiplier of 13 was found to be appropriate for the deceased aged about 33 years in the said case. 15) By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.16,000/- witn the muttiplier of 10, the compensation works out to Rs.1,60,.000/-. The ciaimants are further entitled to receive Rs.5,000/- towards funerai expenses; Rs.5,000/- towards loss of estate; and Rs.5,000/- for loss of consori:ium to the husband. The clalmants, thus, become entitled to receive a total sum of Rs.1,75,000/- as compensation for the death of deceased Radha Bai Sahu in the motor accident on 14.05.2003. 16) Learned counsel for the parties submitted that with a view to avoid any possible dispute between the parties about the pertod 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 appeai itself. 17) The accident in the present case, wherein deceased Radha iai Sahu iost her iife took place in the year 2003; the claim petition was fiied by the claimants in the year 2004; the impugned award came to be passed in the year 2004; the present appeal was filed for enhancement in the year 2005; and the appeal is being finaily decided in the year 2009. Considering ali the relevant factors including the detay in disposal of the claim peiition and the present appeai and the fact that the insurance Company alone is not to be blamed for _the delay in the matter, we quantify the 'E}!.. •E(3», «S :!<^;';t^ ^ amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.62,400/- at Rs.7,600/-. 18) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal fiied by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation is aliowed in part. The compensation of Rs.1,12,600/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.1,75,000/- with further quantified amount of interest of Rs.7,600/- on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.62,400/-. 19) Respondent No.3 The National insurance Company Limited, is granted three months' time for depositlng the total sum of Rs.70,000/- (Rs.62,'K30/- towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.7,600/- towards the quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.62,'WO/-) before the concerning Ciaims Tribunal. 20) No order as to costs. ^—-— Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- l-L-. Jhanvvar Judge nimmi