©.. APPECLANT ~7~ san IN THEHON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M.A.(C)No.- ^Z^jc% :-^THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, THROUGH DIVISIONAL MANAGER, THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, KUTCHERY CHOWK, JAIL ROAD,RAIPUR, TAH. & DISTRICT - RAIPUR (C.G.) (INSURER OF BUS N0.- C.G. 04-E-0582) Vrs. RESPONDENTS/CLAIMANTS ^ ^^ SMT. DHANMATI NAYAK W/0 LATE TILAMANI NAYAK, AGE 50 YRS. RESIDENT OF BEHIND THE SANTOSHI MANDIR, THANA - CITY KOTWALI, DISTRICT - RAIPUR C.G. RESPONDENTS/NON-APPLICANTS ^> ^••5y v^ ••••y^ ^'..A' •^ ^ '^.••' ^' ^ ->5-. SUNIL @ VIKRAM SINGH S/0 SHRI RAMAKANT SINGH RAJPOOT, RESIDENT OF DUBEY TRAVELS BUS STAND, PANDARI, THANA PANDARI, DISTRICT - RAIPUR (C.G.) (DRIVER OF BUS N0.- C.G. 04-E-0582) PRABANDHAK/ MANAGER, M/s. DUBEY TRAVELS BUS STAND, PANDARI, RAIPUR, THANA PANDARI, DISTRICT - RAIPUR (C.G.) (OWNER OF BUS N0.- C.G. d4-E-0582) SONU PRASAD PANDEY S/0 SIYARAM PANDEY, RESIDENT OF SAI NAGAR, RAJENDRA NAGAR, RAIPUR, THANA- CIVIL LINE, DISTRICT - RAIPUR C.G. (DRIVER OF BOLERO VEHICLE N0.- C.G. 07/1492) KAILASH PRADHAN S/0 JAIDHAR PRADHAN, RESIDENT OF LALPUR, KALINAGAR, THANA - TIKARAPARA, TAH. & DISTT. - RAIPUR C.G. (OWNER OF BOLERO VEHICLE N0.- C.G. 07/1492 ) ^..^-' ^ ® ..2.. NATIONAL IN8URANCE COMPANY ^ LIMITED THROUGH DIVISIONAL MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, G.E. ROAD, RAIPUR, TAH. & DISTT.- RAIPUR C.G. (INSURER OF BOLERO VEHICLE N0.- C.G. 07/1492) APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF MOTOR VEHICLE ACT 1988 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DB^: Hon'ble Shri Justice I.M. Quddusi and Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishia Appellant Miscellaneous Appeal (C.) No.822 of 2008 The Oriental Insurance Company Limited versus Respondents Smt. Dhanmati Nayak and others Present: Shri SudhirAgrawal, counsel forthe appellant. Shri S.C.Verma, counsel for respondent No.1. Shri Aman Kesharwani, counsel for respondents No.2 and 3. None for other respondents. Miscellaneous Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act ORAL ORDER (Passedon31s(March,2011) PeiLl.M. Quddusi, J.: Heard. 2. This appeal has been filed by the Oriental Insurance Company Limited against the award dated 23-2-2008 passed by the 9th Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (F.T.C.), Raipur in Claim Case No. 141/2007 insofar as the impugned award relates to quantum partonly. 3. The appellant/insurance company has got permission under Section 170 ofthe Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (henceforth 'the Act'). 4. Brief facts of the case, according to the claimant, in short, are that on the date of accident, i.e., 1-2-2007, atabout 11:20 P.M.,non- claimant Sunil alias Vikram Singh driving a bus bearing registration No.CG 04 E 0582 rashly and negligently, dashed a vehicle (bolero) bearing registration No.CG 07 1492, in which deceased Bharat was riding. As a result of the accident, the deceased died. The incident was reported to the Police Station Abhanpur, District Raipur. The claimant, i.e., mother ofthe deceased preferred an application under Section 166 ofthe Act claiming compensation of Rs.6,42,000/-. 5 . The Claims Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.4,10,000/- in favour of the claimant holding liability to satisfy the award on non- claimants No.1 to 3. 6. The Claims Tribunal has awarded excessive amount of compensation as it has applied multiplier of 17 wrongly and since the deceased was a bachelor, the age of the claimant, who is mother of the deceased, is to beconsidered for computation of the compensation. Further, 50% would be liable to be deducted from the annual income of the deceased towards his personal and living expenses, but the Claims Tribunal has computed according to the age pf the deceased and deducted towards his personal and tiving expenses 1/3rd only. Therefore, in our opinion, the claimant is entitled to get the amount of compensation as under: 7. Considering the income of the deceased as Rs.3,000/- per month, i.e., Rs.36,000/- per annum and after deducting 50% of the annual income towards his personal and tiving expenses, the remainder comes to Rs.18,000/-. According to the principle laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma (Smt) and others vs. Delhj Transport Corporation and another, (2009) 6 •^.^.;£.^te^-^ /'>- '^ ^ i ^^^ % ®^..ISll^% 1 ^ '-'€/ '^^^^ INa*«»»^, SCC 121, multiplier of 13 would be applicable for the agegroup of 46 to 50. Therefore, after applying multiplier of 13, total loss of dependency comes to Rs.18,000/- x 13 = Rs.2,34,000/-. Besides this, the claimant would be entitled to get Rs.10,000/- towards loss of love and affection and Rs.10,000/- towards loss of estate and Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses. Thus, total amount of compensation, which the claimaat would be entitled to get, comes to Rs.2,59,000/-. The claimant would also be entitled to get simple interest @ 7.5% per annum on the amount of compensation of Rs.2,59,000/- from the date of filing of the claim petition till final payment ofthe compensation. 8. The impugned award is modified to the above extent and accordingly, the miscellaneous appeal is allowed in part. There shall be no order as to costs. _- Gopal Sd/- LM-Quddusi Judge Sd/- Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge