r^^p~ -^ HIQH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV QUPTA, C.4. HON'BLE SHRS S^A?jGNATH CHANDRAKAR.J M.A. Np. 294 of 2002 Appellants Claimants 1. Jaydev S/o Biseshawar nai, Aged ebout 40 years 2. Safed Bai, W/o Jaydev Nai, aged about 38 years Both are residents of village Kusmisarar, PS St Dlstt Saraipali, Dlstt Mahasamund Respondents Versys 1. Ramjeevan Singh S/o Ram Swarup Singh Aged about 42 years, R/o VilSage 5 Mohini Mohan Road, Calcutta -20 2 Koshal Chauhan, aged about 32 years, S/o Ram Sukh Chauhan, R/o Village Madhupul Jine, Calcutta • 25 3 The New India Insurance Co.Ltd., 1/10, DEF Road, Duniop Viz Branch, Caicutta _Miscellaneous Appeal u/s173 of the Motor Vehicles Act. 1888 Present : Shri JSP Chandrasen, counsel for the appellants. Shri Dasarath Gupta, counsej for respondent No.3. ORDER (15m June, 2010) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. This is claimants' appeal for enhaneement of the compensation awarded by the Second Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mahasamund(for short 'the Tribunal') vide av^rd dated 23.08.2001, passed in Claim Case No.3/2001. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.9,25,000/- claimed by the appellants/claimants, unfortunate parents of deceased Lalit Kumar by filing a claim petition under Section 166 ofthe Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor acddent on 18.05.1997, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.64,600/- as compensationalong with interest @. 9% per annum from the date of filing ofthe claim petitlon ttll the date of actual payment. 3) The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before tt held that deceased Lalit Kumar died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor acddent on 18.05.1997: the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehide Truck bearing registration No.WB 03 - 6265; as the offending vehide Truck on the date of the atecident was insured with the New India Insurance Company Limtted, the Insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimants. 4) As the respondents have not filed any appeal against the award, the above findings recorded by the Tribunal have now attained finality. 5) The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.600/- per month. By deducting 50% of the income of the deceased^towards his personal expenses, the olaimants' r ^m^~"\ k ^ dependency was assessed at Rs.300/- per month and Rs.3,600/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.3,600/- with the multiplier of 16, the compensation was worked ovt to Rs.57,600/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.6,OOQ/- under other heads, the Tribunal awarded Rs.64,600/- as compensatton (tliere appears to be some mlstake as the correct figure would be Rs.63.600/-). The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation @ 9% per annum from the date of the filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri JSP Chandrasen, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the ciaimants' evidence about the income of the deceased and in assessing his income at Rs.600/- per month only; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.64,600 /- only. 7) Shri Dasarath Gupta, learned counsel for respondent No.3 The New India Insurance Company Limited, on the other hand supported the award and contended that as the claimants could not establish the income of the deceased as pleaded by them, the compensation of Rs.64,600/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances ofthe present case. 8) True, the claimants pleaded that their son deceased Lalit Kumar used to earn Rs.50-60 /- per day as Barber, the Tribunal assessed his income at Rs.20/- per day only. The Tribunal while discarding the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased ought to have asses^d his income on the basls of the notional income prescribed in the Second Schedule under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act. We, therefore, pnopose to re-compute the compensation taking the income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- per annum. 9) As the deceased was un-married on the date of the accident and after his marriage his contributlon to the parents would have been reduced substantially, we deem it proper to deduet 50% of Rs.15,000/- towarcts personal expenses of the deceased in view of the dictum of the Apex Court jn the case of Syed Bastwer Ahamed and others Vs Mohammed Jameel and another reported in (2009) 2 Supreme Court Cases 225. The clajmants' dependency, therefore, is assessed at Rs.7,500/- per annum. 10) As the claimants are parents of the deceased and the age of the father of the deceased was 40 years on the date of the accident, the appropriate muitiplier in the present case would be 10 in view of the dlctum of the Apex Court in the case of Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay Vs Laxman tyer and^another, reported in (2003) 8 SCC-731, wherein it was held that in those cases where the ciaimants are parents of the deceased, the multiplier should never exceed 10. 11) By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.7.500 /- with the multiplier of 10, the compensatlon works out to Rs.75,000/-. The claimants are further entitled to receive Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses; and Rs.5,000/- for toss of estate. Theclaimants, thus, >A. r^pt.. become entitled to receive- a total sum of Rs.85,000/- as compensation for the death of their son Lalit Kumar In the motor accident. 12) Learned counsel for the parties submitted that with a view to avoid any possible dispute between the parties 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 quantifled in this appeal itself. 13) Considering atl the relevant factors ineluding the delay in disposal of the claim petition and the present appeal, and the fact that the Insurance Company afone is not to be biamed for the entire delay in the matter, we quantify the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.20,400/- at Rs.4,600/-. 14) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal flled by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs.64,600/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.85,000/- with further quantified amount of interest of Rs.4,600/- on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.20,400/-. 15) Respondent No.3 The New Jndia Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rs.20,400/-towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.4,600/- towards quantifled amount of interesst on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.20,400/-) before the concernlng Claims Tribunal, 16) No order as to costs. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge padma L