P.R 'Sa>3iT1 LE '••••^s ^.s ifa; Applicant No.1 Claimants 1 Kamll Kujur S/o Dedu Uraon Casts Uraon aged about 55 years, Raimunl w/6 Kamii Kujur, aged about years boih by caste Uraon & R/o villi Pandri Pans Tah.. Kunkuri distt. Jss C.G. Non-applicant No.1 iver Dhirendra Rawani s/o iate Kunj Blhar Rawani aged about 35 years R/o Bijali Toli Jashpur JashpurC.G. riictt U! Non-applicant No.2 2 Gurusharan Singh Bhatia s/o late Kulbir ingh Bhatia aged about 29 year, caste Stand Patha! Gaon, distt. t/0 sus shpur C.G. Non-applicant No.3 3 The New india Insurance Co. Ltd., Division Office Korba distt. Korba. D.0. AcS Present : Shri N.K. Malviya, counsel forthe appeliants, Shri Dasarath Gupta, counse! for respondent No.3. >rd The foliowing order of the Court was passed by ••^*?^. 2 This is claimants' enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jashpur (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 30.12.2005, passed in Claim Case No.03/2005. 2) As agc the appellants/c Kujur by filing c Vehicles Act, for t the compensation of Rs.34,25,000/-, claimed by ;laimants, unfortunate parents of deceased Vijay claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor his death In the motor accident on 18.11.2004, the Tribunal awarded a totai sum of Rs.1,85,000/- as compe'isatlon to the claimants along vvith interest @ 6% pei annum from the date of the fiiing ofthe ciaim pet.'ion tili the date of actual payment. 3) The Tribuna! on a ciose scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held that the clalmants' son Vijay Kujur died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 18.11.2004; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving ofthe driver of the offending vehicie Bus bearing registration No.CG-14A/0093; as the above offending vehicle Bus on the date of the accident was insured with the New India Insurance Company Limited, and t'ne Insurance Company could not estabiish any breach of the policy condltlQns,, the Insurance Company was liabie to pay • the compensation to the claimants. 4) As the respondents hs.ve not filsd any appeal against the avi'ard, the above findings recorded by the Tribunai have now attained finality. 5) The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- per annum. By deducting 1/3rt of Rs.15,000/- towards 1-;'-^\ 3 the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimsnts' dependency was assessed at Rs.10,000/- per annum. By multiplying the snnuai dependency of Rs.10,000/- with the multipiier of 18, the compensatiQn was worked out to Rs.1,80,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.5,000/- under other heads, the Tribunai awarded a total sum of Rs.1,85,000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of their son Vijay Kujur in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.1,85,000/- @ 6% per annum from the date offiling ofthe claim petition til! the date ofactuai payment. 6) Shri N.K. Malviya, learned counse! for the appellants submittsd that the Tribunai has erred in not accepting the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased and in assessing his income at Rs.15,000/- per annum only; and in awarding !ow compensation of Rs.1 ,85,000/- only. 7) Shri Dasarath Gupta, !earned counsel for respondent No.3 the New India Insurance Company Limited, on the other hand supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.1,85,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts andcircumstances ofthe present case. 3) True, the cisimants pleaded that their son Vijay Kujur used to earn Rs.6,000/- per month as LIC Agent, the evidence led in that behalf was not of clinching nature. No material was produced before the Tribunal to establish thatthe deceased was a LIC Agent at ail. In this state of evidence, we do not find any fault in the .\. .®J approach of the Tribunal in discarding the claimants' evidence about the income ofthe deceased. 3) Nevertheless, the income of the deceased assessed by the Tribunal at Rs. 15,0007- per annum in the year 2004 is certainly on the lower side and requires reconsideration. 10) Considering that deceased Vijay Kujur was aged about years on the date of the accident, we are of the opinion that he could have earned Rs.100/- per day in the year 2004 even by working as an unskilled iabour. We, therefore, propose to re- compute the compensation taking the income of the deceased at Rs.100/- per day, Rs.3,000/- per month and Rs.36,000/- per annum. 11) As deceased Vijay Kujur was unmarried on the date of the accident and the claimants are hls parents, 50% of Rs.36.000/- is rsqulred to be deducted towards the personat expenses of the deceased; in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of another reported in (2009) 2 Supreme Court Cases 225. We, therefore, assess the claimants' dependency at Rs.18,000/- per annum by deducting 50% of Rs.36,000/- towards the personai expenses ofthe deceased. 12) Considering that the claimants are parents of the deceased, and claimant No.1 Kamil Kujur, father ofthe deceased was having his own independent income from agriculture, muitiplier of 10 would be appropriate in the present case in view ofthe dictum ofthe Apex Court in the case of Municipai Corporatlon of Greater Bombay t- ^ 1 another, reported in (2003) 8 SCC-731, wherein it was held that in those cases where the claimants are parents of the deceased, the multipller should never exceed 1 0. 13) By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.18,000/- wiih the multipiier of 10, the compensation wprks out to Rs.1,80,000/-. The clalmants are further entitled to receive Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.5,000/- for loss of estate. The claimants, thus, become entitled to receive a total sum of Rs.1,90,0007- as compensation for the death of their son Vijay Kujur in the motor accident. 14) The claimants are further awarded a sum of Rs.1,000/- towards quantified amount of Interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.5,000/-. 15) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs.1,85,000/- awarde.d by the Tribunai is enhanced to Rs.1,90,000/- with further quantified amount of interest of Rs.1,000/- on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.5,000/-. 16) Respondent No.3 the New India Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.6,000/- (Rs.5,000/- towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.1,000/- towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced : t 6 amount of compensation of Rs.5,000/-) before the concerning Claims Tribunal. subbu 7) No order as to costs. Sd/- Ouef Justice Sd/- gnath Caandrakar Jiidge