i2- HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH: BILASPUR SINGLE BENCH: HON'BLE SHRI RAJESHWAR LAL JHANWAR, J. Appellants/ Clainiants Respondents M.A.ICl. No.640/2006 Smt. Kiran Jain and another Versus Abdul Hanif and others. ORDER Pronouncementof order 2.t^..06.2010 Sd/- R.L. Jhanwar Judge i '&ga l' '2^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH: BILASPUR SINGLE BENCH: HON'BLE SHRI R.L.JHANWAR, J. IVI.A.(C) No. 640 of 2006 APPELLANTS CLAIMANTS RESPONDENTS 1. Smt. Kiran Jain, W/o Gautamchand Jain, Aged about 43 yrs. 2. Ku. Anita Jain, D/o Gautamchand Jain, aged about 19yrs. Both residents of Mahadev Ghat Road, Shanti Vihar Colony, post Sundar Nagar, P.S. PuraniBasti, Distt. Raipur(C.G.) VERSUS 1. Abdul Hanif, S/o Abdul Hamid, aged about 22 yrs. R/o Main Road, Dalli Rajhara, Tah. Balod, Distt. Durg (C.G.) 2. Shekh Naruddin, S/o Shekh Mutjimuddin, R/o Nayapara, P.S. Goalbazar, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 3. The New India Insurance Co. Ltd., Divisional Manager, Divisional Office No.2 Bajarang Market, G.E. Road, Distt. Raipur(C.G.) MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLESACT.1994 Appearance: Shri A.S.Singraul, counsel for the appellants. None for respondents No.1 & 2. Shri Shaurabh Sharma, counsel for respondent No.3. ORDER (Passed on 2\i .06.2010) Not being satisfied by the corppensation of Rs.1,82,000/- awarded by the 11th Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (F.T.C.) Raipur (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 21.09.2006 passed in claim case No. 93/2006, the appellants/claimants preferred this.appeal for enhancement. 2. As against the compensation of Rs.12,50,000/- claimed by the appellants/claimants, unfortunate mother and sister of the deceased Rakhi Jain (unmarried) by filing a claim petition U/S 166 read with 140 of the ^-^'i..; Motor Vehicles Act (henceforth 'the Act') for her death in a motor accident on 01.10.2005, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,82,000/- as compensation along with interest at 6% from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 3. Learned counsel for the claimants submitted that the learned Tribunal has erred in not accepting the claimants evidence about the income ofthe deceased and in assessing her income at Rs.15.000/- per annum only awarded low compensation of Rs.1,82,000/- only. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent insurance company, on the other hand, supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.1,82.000/- awarded by the learned Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. He also argued that if notional income is increased from 15.000/- to Rs.36,000/- then the multiplier of 10should be taken instead of 17. He further argued that the deceased is unmarried girl, therefore, the dependency will be % on the total income in view of dictum of Municipal Corporation of GreaterBombayvs. Laxman lyer & another, (2003) 8 SCC 731. 5. I have heard learned counsel for both the parties. Record of the Tribunal and the impugned order perused. 6. True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Rakhi Jain was earning Rs.4000/- per month according to pay certificate Ex.P.7, but the evidence led in that behalf was not of clinching nature. I, therefore, do not find any fault in the approach of the Tribunal in discarding the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased in the present case. 7. In the present case, the income of the deceased assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.15,000/- per annum on the basis of the income prescribed in the Second Schedule under Section 163-A of the Act, requires reconsideration. 8. The notional income of Rs.15,000/- per annum was prescribed in the Second Schedule to Section 163-A of the Act in the year 1994. The accident in the present case, wherein the deceased lost her life, took place in the year 2005. If the increase in the prices of the essential commodities and the cost of living between the year 1994 and the year .,r'"% '"'% •^I^J '^•SF--3S' 2005, the year of accident in the present case are taken consideration, the notional income of Rs.15,000/- prescribed in the Second Schedule to Section 163-A of the Act in the year 1994 would certainly come to Rs.36,000/- in the year 2005. I, therefore, propose to recompute the compensation taking the income of the deceased at Rs.36,000/- per annum. 9. Considering that the deceased Rakhi was unmarried on the date of the accident and after her marriage, her contribution to the parents would have been reduced, 1 deem it proper to deduct 50% of the income of the deceased towards her personal expenses. The claimants' dependency, therefore, is assessed at Rs.18,000/- per annum. 10. The multiplierof 17 selected by the Tribunal is not proper because the deceased was unmarried girl of claimant No.1. The Apex Court in the case of Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay vs. Laxman lyer & another, (2003) 8 SCC 731 wherein it was held that in those cases where the claimants are the parents of the deceased, the multiplier should never exceed 10. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.18,000/- with the multiplier of 10, the compensation works out to Rs.,1,80,000/-. The claimants are further entitled to receive Rs.12, OOO/- towards other heads. Thus, the claimants become entitled to receive a total sum of Rs.1,92,000/- as compensation for the death of Rakhi Jain in the mbtor accident. 11. 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 quantified inthis appeal itself. 12. The accident in the present case, wherein deceased Rakhi Jain lost his life, took place in the year 2005; the.claim petition was filed by the claimants in the year 2005; the impugned award came to be passed in the year 2006 and the present appeal fpr enhancement of the compensation was filed by the appellants in the year 2006 and the appeal is being finally decided in the year 2010. Considering all the relevant factors including the delay in disposal of the claim petition and the present appeal and the ,,j^^a-L-^.., ^" s~"~:; ^,,?'"1"^. ''. •'S1' .-^ 1&8- -. - V-:. ^ t~ »^' ^^ fact that the tnsurance Company alone isnot to be blamed for the entire detay in the matter, 1 quantify the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs. 10,000/- at Rs.3000/-. 13. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants / ctaimants for enhancement of the compensation is atlowed in part. The compensation of Rs.1,82.000/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.1,92.000/- with further quantified interest of Rs.3,000/- on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.10,000/-. 14. Respondent No.3 - The New India Insurance Co. Ltd., is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.13,000/- (Rs.10,000/- towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.3,000/- towards the quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs. 10,000/-) before the concerning Claims Tribunal. No order as to costs. Sd/- R.L. Jhanwar Judge