^~ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR blVISiON BENCtf Appeilants CSaimants HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV QUPTA, C.J. HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR.J •M.A.No.1168of20CS 1. Smt Pumnam Bai, aged about 25 years, widow of Brijlal @ Ashik Satnami, Profession - housewife 2. Kumari Bharti, aged aboirt 11 years, D/o late Brijlat @ Ashik Satnami 3. Sarjudas, aged ^oout 65 years, S/o Sanu Das (father of the deceased Brijlal) (On behalf of the appeltant / ctaimant No.2 the minor, the appellant / claimant No.1 her mother) Iplllllg IH Versus Respondente 1. Manoj Kumar, aged about 26 years, S/o Chandra Patel, R/o viltage ward No.13 Ramnagar, Azad Chowk, Bhlllai, PS Supeia, Di^tt Durg (CG) 2 Lakhanlal Mandavi, S/o late Ramadhin Msndavi, R/o through Vandana Gass Agency Kailash Nagar, Bhilai, Dist Durg 3 The New India Insurance Company Limited, St^ion Road, Durg (CG), Through - the Divisional Manager, DMsional Office Kachahari Chowk, Raipur, (CG) Mlsc. Apfieal under SecUon 173 of the Motor Vehlcles Act Present Ms Somshukla Sarkar, counsel for the appellants. None for respondents No.1 & 2 though served. Shri Saurabh Sharma, counsel for lesporaJCTit No.3. Bffiiiiilti.j :B:I%;s;i^s;^^^^^:^li^ii3^^3^i^^^^ rf' Order (25*h March.2010) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C:J. This is claimants' appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the 13th Motor Accldent Claims Tribuna!, Raipur, (for short "the Tribunal') vide award dated 29.04.2005, passed inClaim Case No.76/2004. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.58,00,000/- claimed by the appeltants/claimants, unfortunate widow, minor daughter and father of deceased Brijtat @ Ashik Satnami, by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his deatli Ih the motor accident on 21.05.2004, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,79,500/- as compensation along with Interest @ 7% per annum from the date of flling of the clalm petitton till the date of actual payment. 3) The Tribunat on a close scrutlny of the entire evltence led before it held that deceased Brijlal @ Ashik Satnami died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor aceident on 21.05.2004; the accldent occunwJ due to rash and negligent driving ofthe driver-ofthe offending vehicle truck; as the effending vehicle truck on the date of the accident was insured with the New Indla Insurance Company Limited, the Insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimants. iiMi^n' Bifei ::li t II J ;S!iS3«'" 3 4) As the respondents have not flled any appeal against the award, the above flndings recorded by the Tritoinal have now attalned flnal'rty. 5) The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- per annum on the basis of notional income prescritod in the Second Schedule under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehictes Act. By deducting 1/3rd of Rs.15.000/- towards the ^rsonal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.10,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.10,000/- with the multlplier of 17, the compensation was worked out to Rs.1,70,000/-. By awardir^ further sum of Rs.9,500/- under other heads, the Tribunat awarded a total sum of Rs.1 ,79,500/- as compensation. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.1,79,500/- @ 7% per annum from the date of the filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Smt Somshukla Sarkar, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in rtot accepting the ctaimants' evidence about the income of the deceased and in assessing his income at Rs.15,000/- per annum only; and in awarding low compensatlon of Rs.1 ,79,S)0/- only. 7) Shri Saurabh Sharma, leamed counsel for r^pondent o.3 The New India Insurance Company Limited, on the other hand supported the award and contended that the Trtbunal has been quite liberal in awardlng substantlal compensatton of Rs.1,79,* to the claimants. IIBU U fll lasSiSSSSSsVS^W^ & '»:<^' 4 ^ IBiiia 8) In a motor accident claim case what Is Important Is that the compensation to be awarded by the Courts / Trlbunate should be just and proper conipensatfon in the facts and cireumstances of the case. it should neither be a meager amount of compensation, nor a bonanza. 9) Now, we shall examine as to whether ttie compensation of Rs.1,79.500/- awarded by the Tribunal ts just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances ofthe present case. 10) True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Brijlal @ Ashik Satnami used to earn Rs.6,00)/- per month by working as a hetper in Vidya Sagar Industri^ Limited, Anjore, Rajnandgaon, but the evidence led in that behalf was not of clinching nature. (n this state of evidence, we do not flnd any fault in the approach of the Tribunat in discarding the claimants' evidence about ttie income of the deceased. 11) Neverthel^s, the Income of the deceased assessed by the Tribunat at Rs.15,000/- per annum in the year2004 is c»rtainlyon the lower side and requtres reconsideration. 12) Section 163 — A of the Act where-under the Second Schedule was introduced in the year 1994 reads as fotlows : ' "[163 A. Special provisions as to jayment of compeosation on structured fonnula basis - (1) Notwith^andng anyffilng contained In this Act or in any other law for the time being !n force or instrument havlng ftie force of law, theowner of ttte motor vdiicle or the authorized insurer shall be llabte to pay in .-<£3';%A1ll,;^ tlllt 5 the case of death or pamanent disablement due to accident arising out of the use of motor vehicle, compensation, as indtwrted ih the Second Schedule, to the legal heirs or ttie victim, as the ease may be. E)q3lanatlon - For the purt»se8 of this sub- section, "permanent dlsability" stotl have the same meaning and extent as in the Wortonen's Compensatlon Act, 1923 (8of 1923). (2) In any claim for (wmpensatlon underSub - Section (1), the claimant shalt not be required to plead or establish that the death or permanent disablement in re^iect ofwhlch the claim has been made was due to any wrongful act or neglect or default of the owner of the vehicle or vehicles concemed or of any other person. (3) The Central Govemment may, keeping in view the cost of IMng by notlficertton in the Offic'tat Gazette, from time to tiffre amend the Second Schedule." 13) The above quoted Sub - Section (3) of Section 163 - A of the Act mandated the Central Government to amend the Second Schedule from time to time keeping in view the cost of livlng. 14) ' As the Central Govemment has failal in amending the Second Schedule as provlded in Sub - Section (3) of Section 163 - A of the Act, the ©ourts/ Trfeunal can takejudiclal notice of increase In the prtces of essential commodlttes and the cost of Ihring during the perlod between the Introduetion of the Second 6 ijta ^ Schedule in the year 1994 and the date of accident in the given case. 15) Now, reverting to the present case, the accident wherein deceased Brijlal @-Ashik Satnami lost his life took place In the year 2004. If the increase in the prices of essentlat commodities and the cost of living during the period between 1994 and 2004 are taken into consideration, the nQtional Income of Rs.15,CKX)/- prescnbed in the Second Schedule in the year 1994 would certalnly corae to Rs.36,000/- in the year 2004. We, therefore, propTOe to re-compute the compensation taldng the income ofthe dweased at Rs.36,000/- per annum. 16) By deducting the usual 1/3"* af Rs.36,000/- towarcte the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dqiendency is assessed at Rs.24,000/- perannum. 17) Considering the age of the deceased, his firther, wldow and minor daughter, we are of the Ofanion that multiplier of 13would be appropriate in the present case. 18) By muttiplying the annual dependeroy of Rs.24,OM/- wth the multlpller of 13, the compensation wort®out to Rs.3,12,CUO/-. The claimants are further entitled to recelve Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses; Rs.5,000/- for loss of estate; and Rs.5,000/- for loss of consortium to the wldow. The claimants, thus, become entitled to receive a tota) sum of Rs.3,27,000/- as compensation for the death of deceased Brijtal @ AsMk Satnami in the motor accident. 19) Leamed counsel for the parties submitted that wtth a view to ^lS^.'^KSlMf.ll nae-a*' ^. MlB!.ilia«F:iH tx^SF avoid any possibte dtspute between the parties about ttie period for which the claimants are entltled to receive interest on the enhanced amount of compensatlon, the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation may be quantifled inthis appeal iteelf, 20) Considering all the relevant factore includlng the delay in disposa! oftheclaim petition and the present appeat, and the fact that the Insurance Company alone is not to be blamed for the entire deiay in the matter, we quantify the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.1,47.KW- at Rs.12,500/-. 21) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal flled by the ctalmants for enhancement of the compensatlon is allowaj in parfc The compensation of Rs.1,79,500/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.3,27,000/- with further quantifled amount of hterest of Rs.12,500/- on the enhanced amount of compensatton of Rs.1,47,500/-. 22) Respondent No.3 The New India Insuiance Compsffiy Ltmlted is granted three months' time for depositing the totel sum of Rs.1,60,000/- (Rs.1,47,500/- towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.12,500/- towards quantified amount of irrterest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.1,47,500/-) before the concemmg Clalms Tribunal. 23) Noorder as to costs. r^^~s~~ Sd/- Chief Jusdce Sd/- R.N.Chaadrakar Judge padma —^-•-•••;u- -i^s ,!;3aais;: sS.iSsi-Svy-nw