r ,^l C^3' IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M.A. ( C ) N0. / n ^4 / 2009 fD.B.l APPELLANT INSURER ^l&^ ......-.^?s? -'./ ^^^^^^ vi?T'....--'"" RESPONDENTS CLAIMANTS (1862) Versus :1. 2. DRIVER 3. OWNER 4. ^ isson s'ancl National Insurance Company, Through - The Branch Manager, Divisional Office, Branch Office, Bilaspur-fC.G.) Smt. Santara Bai, W/o Late Madho Prasad Patley, Aged about 55 years Rohit Kumar S/o Late Madho Prasad Patley, Aged about 13 years Respondent no.2 is minor through natural guardian mother Santra Bai, Both R/o Village Kevtara, Post & P.S. - Pachpedi, Tahsil - Masturi, Distt. Bilaspur-fC.G.) Sewakram @ Ramnarayan S/.o Mangal Mishra, Aged about 40 years, R/o Khamhi, Post - Khamhi, Tahsil & P.S. - Lormi, Distt. Bilaspur-(C.G.) Ajay Kumar Agarwal, S/o Bajranglal, Aged about 45 years, R/o -'' Main Road Kargiroad Kota, Tahsil &i:P.S. - Kota, Distt. Bilaspur-(C.G.) rt' HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR DB: HON'BLE I.M. QUDDUSI 65 HON'BLB PR&SHANT Kt. MISHRA, JJ miSC. APPEAL No. 1054/2009 National Irtsurance Coinpaay Vs. APPEAL UNDBR SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT 1988 APPEARANCE: Mr. Raj Awasfhy, counsel for fhe appeUant. None for fhe respondeats. ORDER(ORAL) (19.01.2011) Per I.M. QUDDUSI, J, 1. When the uiatter is taken up for heanng, counsel for fhe appeUaat is present, but no one appears on behalf of fhe respondents despite service of notice. Therefore, we proceed to hear fhe niattgr fiiially. 2, We have heanl learaed counsel for the appeUaat at quite lengfb and have also perused fh.e records ofthe Tribunal. 3. This appeal has been filed by the Insurance Coinpauy against fhe iuipugned dated 18.02.2009, passed by ftie II Addl. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspiir (C.G) m Claun Case No. 120/2007 graating compensation to fhe tune ofRs. 4,35,000/- to the claimants. 1 4; Brief facts of fhe case as per ftie version of fhe claimants are fhat on 21.06.2007 deceased Basant Kuinar along-with RESPONDBNTS Smt. Saiitara Bai & ofhers his fiiend Kamalriarayan Ratre was goiag to Korba froia Bilaspur on his Hero Houda Motorcycle bearing Regn.No.C.G.10-BC/6068. On the way at about 1.45 p.m. when fhey reached a Petrol Punip near vfllage Sutarra, a passenger Bus bearing Regn.No.C.G.10-ZA/0663 coining Iroiu oppositB side which was being driven by respondent no.3 ia a rash and negMgent ruarLaer dashed the niotorcycle of fhe deceased, as a result of which, the deceased has sustained a serious head iD.iury. He was broueht to CoTnTnunity Healfh Center, Katghora, for priiuary treatnient froin where he was referred to CIMS Hospital, Bilaspur aad again froia CIMS Hospital, Bilaspur, he was referred to Dr. Ambedkar Hospital, Raipur where he ultunately died on 23.06.2007 during fhe course offaTeataiient. The deceased was bachelor aad was a practisuig advocate in BUaspur haviug inonthly eaming of Rs.15,000/-. The claunants are inofher aad minor brofher aad they beiug dependents aad legal representatives of the deceased have inade clann to fhe tune of Rs. 18,10,000/- on various heads. 5. ' The learaed Clauus Tribuiial has held fhat due to rash aad negligent driviug of its driver i.e., respondent no.3, the offendiag bus dashed the luotorcycle of Basaat Kuuiar, as a result of which he died duruig the coui~se -of treatinent. It has further held that it is not proved that at the tinie of accident, ftie offending Bus was plied ia breach of ftie conditions offhe iasurance poUcy. - /y\ ^C^aSSESs, I •l *<is»~^§^ 'fe?--y ^. Regarding ftie iacoiae of fhe deceased the Tribunal has held fhat the deceased was uiunamed and by profession, he was an advocate. Though claimaats wltnesses nainely Saatara Bai (A.W.l) aud Kamahiarayau Ratre (A.W.2) have Stated fhat the iacoiae of the deceased was in between Rs. 10,000 and 20,000/- but fhere was no documentaiy evidence ia support of his iacoine. Therefore, the Tribuaal has taken fhe iucoine of ftie deceased as Rs.3500/- per nionth and fhus assessed the atuiual iacome as Rs.42,000/-. After deducting l/3rd towards personal aad Uviag expenses, the annual loss ofdependency was worked out as Rs.28,000/- (Rs.42,000 - 14,000). It is wefl settled law that if the deceased is bachelor, one-half (1/2) has to be deducted towards staadard deduction but fhe Tribunal has deducted 1/3 which is not proper. Therefore if we deduct one-hatf (1/2) towards personal expenses froza fhe aiuiual iacoine fhat is Rs.42,000/-, fhe annual loss of dependency coiues to Rs.21,000/-. In the uistaut case, inother aad minor brofher are fhe claunaats, therefore, lookmg to the age of fhe deceased as 40 years wbich coiaes withia the age group of 36 to 40 years, niultipUer 15 would be appUcable in view of fhe inultiplier scale prescribed by Hon'ble fhe Supreine Court in Sarla Vemw. (^nt.) -us- Delhi Tremsport Corporcttlon anct another (Para 40) reported ia (2009) SCC 121. Thus the total loss of dependency coiaes to Rs.3,15,000/- (Rs.21,000 x 15). Besides this, under fhe other heads, the claunaats are also entifled to Rs.2,500/- for medical expenses, Rs.5000/-- towards funeral expenses, ~-v-< '•S.SSftlk ~°<a••». Rs.10,000/- for loss of estate, Rs.5000/- each to fhe two claimants for loss of love aud affection (total Rs. 10,000) which ia aU comes to Rs.27,500/-. Ifwe add this amount to the total loss of dependency, the total coinpensation comes to Rs.3,42,500/- (Rs,3,15,000 + 27,500) which the claimaiits are entiUed to receive froin the appeUaat 7. Accordtagly, the award of the Tribunal that is Rs.4,35,000/- is reduced to Rs.3,42,500/-. This award shaU also carry uiterest @ 6% per annuiu froin fhe date of filiag of the appUcation tiU the payment is luade. Counsel fee Rs.1000/- as directed by fhe Tribunal shall remaiii in tact. 8. Respondent no.2 wfll get Rs.2 lakhs but fhe same shatl be deposited in any nationalized baols: for a period of 12 years under fhe guardianship of his inother as he is rninnr and the reiaainiag ainount shall be paid to the niofher of the deceased after adjusting fhe amount, if any, already received by her. 9. In fhe result, appeal is aUowed ia part. The iuipugned order . of fhe Tribunal dated 18.02.2009 passed ia Claim Case No. 120/2007 is luodi&ed to the above extent No order as to cost(s). Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge •Sd/- ashant Kumar Mishra Judge Rao L