18 THE HI6H OF JiT&IGAIXIBE A3? BILASPm (GHIU2'SISGJ! Oivision Bef?c& 19 ^gGBLLAKBOUS APPBAI>nfiIi 01 APPBLLANIS ^eLAIMMIS //1« ^t.Ilema Verma, WLfe of late Rasi N^Qflta Terma, aged about ?? years* jBhv^v) 'Ku.^iya, daaghter ©flate lajesh Verma^ aged about 9 years. Abhisaek Jerma., son of late ^^Saje^i Verma, aged about 6 years. AppeUants 2 and 3 are miiiors tiarou^a legal guardiaa Appellaat N©.1Sia-fc.Ieiaa Veraa. All residents of Qr.No· 273, Ward H@<6,Bans^aafe, Bex^a,disfc.Rewa (M.P) Vs. SESPGHBEHIS: ^ 1. Nd.Irfajn s©nof M<l,STOlemaa,aged '\ aboafe ^3 y^ars, resident' of b^aind State Bank, JSanendragarh,dist«Korea (C©) ^\''l^ -.. J^-f^ 2^Ba^ Kiamar, son of Sukhnandan Panika. .,- ^^''^<. IK-^iged aboQt 28 years, resident of Pasori, .•#' T) <%^ir^i>iQan4 ^Tsi4- ir^w^^ /r* fi^ ^. ^ •T^ P.S.Keliaari, dJLsfc<K©rea(G.©) S.^QrieQfeal Insuraaoe Gompany Limited •oagh Braraeh Kanager, Braneh Ambikapur, dist.Surgaja (C.&). 'S\S^ ^MOEtWU^ OF APPEAL 11/5 17^ OF MOTOR •gEHIGLBS ^^Wf^ ?QR SNHAMGEM^T OF THB-A^AR® (3> ^ » " ^ HJGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Misc. Appeal (0 No. 905 of 2007 APPELLANTS CSaimanSs Smt. Nema Verma & others VERSUS RESPONDENTS : Md. Irfan & others (Misc. Appeal under Section 173 ofthe MotorVehicles A^^ DB: Hon'ble Shri N.K. Aaarwal & Hon'ble Shri R.N. Chandrakar. JJ. Present : Smt. Anju Ahuja, Advocate for the appeilants. Shri Sudhir Agrawal wsth Shri P. Dutta, Advocates for respondent No. 3/insurance Company. ORALORDER (Passed on 21.11.2011) Per: N.K. Agarwal, J. 1. Cross objection filed by the respondent No. 3/0riental Insurance Co. Ltd.is dismissedas not pressed. 2. This is claimant's appeal for enhancement of compensation in the award dated 19.12.2006, passed by the Ist Addl. Motor Accident Clajms Tribuna!, Manendragarh, Distt. Koriya (for short 'the Tribunal') in ciaim case No. 40/05. 3. As against the compensation of Rs. 19,20,000/- clalmed by the unfortunate mother and minor chiidren of deceased Rajesh Kumar Verma by filing applicatjon under Section 166 ofthe Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'MV Act'), for death of Rajesh Kumar Verma in the motor accident on 10.05.2005; tfte Tribunai has awarded a total sum of Rs. 5,57,400/- as compensation ^ aiong with interest @ 6 percent per annum from the date of application till its actual payment. 4. The Tribunal, on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led, material placed and submissions made by the parties, held : accident had occurred due to rash and negligent drivjng of Jeep bearing registration No. CG-16-ZD-0421 by its driver i.e. respondent No. 2/Raj Kumar; Rajesh Kumar Verma died on account of injuries sustained by him in the said accsdent; Rajesh Kumar Verma was occupant of Jeep; respondent No. 3/0riental Insurance Co. Ltd. liable for payment of compensation as it could not establish violation of policy conditions; assessed and awarded aforesaid sum as compensation in favour of claimants. 5. Smt. Anju Ahuja, learned counsel appearing for the appellants would submit: the Tribunal has erred in taking the income of deceased as Rs. 4300/- per month only for the purpose of computation of compensation; in awarding Rs. 7000/- only on other heads and thereby in awarding (ow amount of compensation, therefore, award amount deserves to be suitably enhanced. 6. On the other hand, Shri Sudhir Agrawal and Shri P. Dutta, iearned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 3/0riental Insurance Company Ltd. supported the award impugned and submitted in the facts and circumstances of the case, the amount ^ . . . . . . .. ^ awarded by the Tribunal is some what on higher side and does not call for any interference. /£!<ai| ''-^^.^^' 7. We have heard the counsel appearing for the parties, perused the record of Tribunal jnduding award impugned. 8. True, the claimants have pteaded the income of deceased as Rs. 5073/"per month, but failed to substantiate the same by exhibiting & proving salary certificate, therefore, the income of deceased as Rs. 4300/- per month taken by the Tribunal on its ow/n estimate cannot be found fault with. The Tribunal, looking to the age of deceased as 35 years at the time of accident, has rightly applied multiplier of 16 in view of judgment of Supreme Court in c&se of Sarla Verma (Smt.) & others V. Delhi 'fiansport Corporation and another, wherein r.iultiplier of 16 has been prescribed fbrthe age group between 31-35 years. Thus, the award of Rs. 5,50,400/- passed by the Tribuna! on account of loss of dependency do not suffer from any infirmity. 9. However, the ciaimants, being widow mother and minor children, In our considered opinion, the amount of Rs. 7000/- awarded by the Tribunal on other heads is some what on lower side which deserves to be suitably enhanced. 10. When the matter is examined in the light of above mentioned broad features of the case, in our opinion, further award of Rs. 7,000/- inclusive of interest component would make the compensation of Rs. 5,57,400/- awarded by the Tribunal as just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the preserit case. 1 /2009 (6) SCC 121 •"^^-.. '^ ^, 1:^. ^ ^ •?'^ ^ :w ^ 11. Therefore, the appeal filed by the claimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The claimants are awarded further sum of Rs. 7,000/- over and above the amount awarded by the Tribunal. The award is modified to the above extent. Rest of conditions mentioned in the award shal! remain intact. 12. Respondent No. 3/ Oriental Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs. 7,000/- before the concerning Claims Tribunal. No order as to costs. Sd/- N.K. AgarwaS Judge Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge Sahu