et ^' v^ r IN THE HIGH COURT OFLCHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR 2-1 ^— 4f2QQIT ^h (G^vy- M.ATNO. ARPELLANTS T^ M A7.^' SPONDENTS 1,, Q^> »eey Yavendra Singh @ Baba, Son of Padum Singh, Caste-Gond, Aged about 36 years, R/o. Village Kerijugera, P.S. Dondilohara, District Durg (C.G.). (Driver ofTractor No.C.G.OSA 1224) Padum Singh, S/o. Jailal Singh, Caste Gond, Aged about 69 years, R/o. Village Kerijugera, P.S. Dondilohara, District Durg (C.G.) (Owner ) VERSUS The New India Insurance Company Limited, through Divisional Manager, Division Office Power House Bhilai, District Durg (C.G.). 2. Smt. Hemlata, Widow of Tomanlal, Aged about 29 years. ,3. Khomesh, S/o. Tomanlal, Aged about 7 years, ^X Punam Prabhat, S/o. Tomanlal, ^? Aged about 5 years. 5. Ku. Trilochna, D/o. Tomanlal, Aged about 3 months, Respondent No. 3 8& 5 both minor through guardian mother Smt. Hemlata, Widow of Tomanlal. ^ 6y Mahabali, S/o. Bhaiyaram, Aged about 50 years. (3 Smt. Ruhailin Bai, W/o. Mahabali, Aged about 48 years, All resident of Chikhli, Post Kodekasa, P.S. Dondilohara, Tahsil Dondilohara, District Durg (C.G.). MISC^APPEAL U/S. 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLE ACT 1988 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR DB: Hon*ble I. M. QUDDUSI & Hoa*ble GHULAM MINHAJUDDIN, JJ APPELLANT: RESPONDENTS: M.AJC1 No. 212/2008 Yavendra Siagh aad aaother Vs. The New India Insuraace CoiBLpaiiy Limited and aaofher MISC. APPBAL UNDER 8BCTION 173 OF THB MOTOR VEHICLES ACT.1988 Appearance: Mr. Pawao. Kesanvani, counsel for the appeUaats. Mr. H. P, Agrawal, counsel for respondent no.l, Per I.M. QUDDUSI. J. ORAL ORDER (1S.07.2011) 1. This appeal has been filed by the driver & owner of ftie Tractor- TroUey agauist fhe inipugned award dated 22,12,2006 passed by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Balod, Distt. Durg (C.G) ia Claini Case No.27/2005 so far as it relates to fasteniag Uabitlty on the owner aad driver as weU as quaiituia fixed by the Tribunal. 2< Brief facts of the case as per fhe version of the clalmaats are fhat on 05.05,2005 deceased Toinan Lal after loaduig fhe TroUey No. 1225 attached by Tmctor bearmg Regn.No.C.G.05- A/1224 with boulders at Lohara was comiag back to his viUage Kaid Jujenra. On the way, near Raigarh Ghat Rengadabri road the said Tractor-TroUey which was beiag driveu by non-appUcaat no, 1 Yavendra Siagh @ Baba in rash aad negligent maaner tumed turtte, as a result of which Toinaalal sustaicted injuries and died. At tiie tiine of accident, fhie deceased was aged about 32 years. He was workmg as Secretaiy ia Graia Panchayat Junjera and was earmng Rs.2000/- per monfh. The claimaats beiag dependente/legal //"^ "^ Bi^-^ii&^, ^ 1 ¥i|gi^j ^ "^-"'/ ^^^;......-."..-^ representatives have filed claiai petition u/ s 166 of fhe Motor Vehicles Act for fhe aEward of a total coinpensation of Rs,10,20,000/- on vanous heads wifh 12% iaterest per anmim. 3. The Clauns Tribiinal after consideriag ffae issues fi^uned by it partlally atlowed fhe claini appUcation of fh.e claimacits, awarded a suin ofRs.3,32,000/- as coinpensation and fastened liabUity on fhe driver and owner offhe Tractor & TroUey, 4. We have heard learaed counsel for fhe pardes aad have also perused fh.e rccords of fhe Tribunal. 5. A perusal of the record shows fhat the deceased had taken the Tractor & TroUey for fhe purpose of transporting fhe boulders for construction of caaal ia his field. He hiinself was sitting at fhe jomt between fhe Tractor oitd TroUey. He was not eveii a labourer deputed to work on fhe Tractor & TroUey but was posted as Secretary viUage Paachayat Kaui Junjera. Hence, ia no case thie iiisurarice conipaay caa be held Uable to pay conipensation. Therefore, it is fhe liabiUty of fhe owner only to pay conipensation aad to fhis exteat, we fiad no good grouud to interfere ui fhe impugned award. 6. Now coming to fhe quaatum, fhe Tribunal has assed fhe io^coine of the deceased as Rs.24,000/- per aauura which fhe leanied counsel for fhe appeUaats does not dispute. The Tribunal has deducted l/3rd towards staadard deduction which is not proper. As there are six claimants, foUowiag fhe decision of fhe Supreine Court ia Scurla Verma (Smt^) cmd others -vs- Delhi Transpart CarparaUon and anothcr, (SW09) 6 SCC 121, l/4th is to be deducted towanls personal aad Uvrng expenses. Therefore, upon deductmg l/4th, fhe aanual loss of dependency coines to Rs.18,000/-. The age of the deceased was 38 years and he comes imder the age group of 36-40 years, The Tribunal has adopted the miiltipUer 17 which seems to be on higher side, Accordiag to fhe multiplier scale given ia Sarla Venna's case (supra) vide para 40, multiplier 15 should have been made applicable aad fhus the total loss ofdependency comes to Rs.2,70,000/- (18000 x 15). », 1':^;;,.';.^1, »- Besides fhis, fhe widow appUcant no,l is entiUed to get Rs.5000/ - as k>ss of consortiuia aad fhe other clatmants are entitled to Rs.5000/- each for loss of love aad affection (Total Rs.25,000/-); Rs.5000/- for loss of estate and Rs.5000/- for funeral expenses, which ui aU coines to Rs.40,000/- over the oftier heads. If we add fhis ainount to fhe total loss of dependency, fhe total coinpensation coxaes to Rs.3,10,000/- which the claimaats are entifled to receive froni fhe owner. However, fhe Tribiiaal has awarded a total coinpensation of Rs.3,32,000/- which is liable to be aad is hereby reduced to Rs.3,10,000/-. The said amount shall also cany siniple interest @ 6% per aanuin froin fhe date of filiag of fhe claini petition tiU fhe payiaent of conxpensation, In fhe result, the appeal is aUowed ia part. The ixnpugned awaid dated 22.12.2006 passed in Claim Case No.27/2005 is niodified ia fhe above tenns. Rest of fhe conditions raentioned ia ftie award shaU reinaia. iatact. No order as to cost[^ Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- G. Minhajuddin Judge Rao