;^RK'S>, 1 •s- »; JJ' •^ '&-S..y ^'^' L o- HIGHCOURTOFCHHOTTISG^ DIVIS10NBENCH Coram HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, CJ. & HON'BLE SHRI SUNU- KUMAR SINHA, J. APPELLANTS titaBiiEl'F ^' .RESPONDENTS NON-APPLICANTS M. A. (Cl <PRl No. 3480 of 2008 1. Smt. Rambha Bai Sahu, W/o Late Shambhu Sahu, Aged about 43 years, 2. Salik Ram Sahu, Aged 22 yeara, S/o LateShambhu Sahu, 3. Neelam Kumar Sahu, S/o Late Shambhu Sahu, Aged about 19 years, 4. Ku. Laxmi Sahu, D/o Late Shambhu Sahu, Agedabout 15 years 5. Ku. Jagriti Sahu, D/o Late Shambhu Sahu, Aged about 13 years Appellants No. 4 & 5 are minor and appellant No.lis natural guardian of 4&5. All are R/o Village Jamgaon Chowki Birejhar, Tahsil Kurud, District Dhamtari (C.G.) Versus 1. Mohammad Irfan, S/o Shri Abdul Samad, ^ed about 25 years, R/o BhanpuriRing Road, Raipur,Tahsil & Distrtet Ralpur (C.G.) (Driver of Alleged Vehicte) 2. Subrat Day, S/o S.C. Dey, Proprietor Mata Garage Pandri Raipur, Tahsil & District Ralpur (C.G.) (Owner of alteged Vehtele) 3. The Manager, I.C.t.C.I. Lombard General Insuranee Company Ltd., Lat Ganga Shopping Complex G.E. Road, Raipur (C.G.) MISCELtANEOUS APPEAL UNDER SECT10N 173 OF THE MOTORVEHICLESACT »Stj,**^w- Present: Shri Vivek Rathore, leamed counsel for the appellants. ORDER ith (10InFebruary,2009) The fotlowing order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J.: Shri Vivek Rathore, leamed counsel for the appellants is heard on admission. 2) This !s claimants' appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the First Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (FTC), Raipur (for short the Tribunal') vide award dated 27.08.2008,passed in Ctaim Case No.19/2008. 3) As against the compensation of Rs.11,60,000/- claimed by the claimants, unfortunate widow and children of deceased Shambhu Sahu by filing a claim petition under SecUon 166 ofthe Motor Vehicles Act, Tor his death in the motor accident on 01.01.2008, the -Tnbunal awarded a totat compensation of Rs.3,44,500/- atong with interest @ 6% per annum ftom the date offiling ofthe claimpetition till the dateofactual payment. 4) Shri Vivek Rathore, learned counsel for the appellants vehemently argued that the Tribunat has erred in not accepting the claimants' evidence about the income ofthe deceased and in assessing his income at Rs.3,000/- per month and Rs.36,000/- per annum; in deducting 1/3rd of the income Qf the deceased towards his personal expenses; 1n selecting the lower multiplier of 13; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.3,44,500/- only. f' ^w 1K. S "'^ s S<ti ^ 5) True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Shambhu Sahu used to eam Rs.4,000/- per month as Labour, but the evldence led in that behalf was not of clinching nature. In this state of evidence, the Tribunal was left with no other altemative but to assess the income of the deceased on its own estlmate. 6) On due consideration, we are satisfied that the assessment of the income of the deceased by the Tribunal at Rs.3,000/- per month and Rs.36,000/- per annum does not suffer from any inflrmity. 7) The assessment of the claimants' dependency by the Tribunal at Rs.2,000/- per month and Rs.24,000/- per annum by deducting usual 1/3"' of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses also cannot be found fault wfth. 8) The multiplier of 13 selected by the Tribunal is rather on the higher side 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 ACJ 825, wherein the multiplier of 13 was found to be appropriate for the deceased in the sald case, aged about 33 years, whereas in thepresent case deceased Shambhu Sahu, was aged about 45 years. 9) For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any scope for enhancement of the compensatlon awarded by the Tribunal elther on account of the assessment of the income of the deceased or the claimants' dependency by the Tribunal or the multiplier selected. ,::. -", ^ '. .•.fc.'^-.. '^ 4 10) The Appeal, therefore, falts and is hereby dismissed summarily on merits notwithstanding that it is barred by time of .ju"—^ays. ________ Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge subbu i|(«f-«-*te8