^^3 HIGH_COURT QFCHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISIONBENCH 'BLESHRI RAJEB/ GUPTA, CJ. 'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKARJ. Mlisc. Appeal No.1120of2004 Ciaimants Driver Owner Insurer 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Smt. Khakhara Bai, W/o Late Hem Singh Gond, agedabout 42years Ku. Rajkumari, D/o Late Hem Singh Gond, aged about 12 years, Rajkumar, S/o Late Hem Singh Gond aged about 07 years, Ku. Ram Kumari, D/o Late Hem Singh Gond, ageGlabout04years Rajesh Kumar, S/o Late Hem Singh Gond, aged abQut 02 years, No.2 to 5 Minor Throygh Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Khakhara Bai, W/o Late Hem Singh Gond, -.? All R/o Village Sirki, P.S. Pali, District Korba(C.<3.) 1. Ram Khitawan Rathore, S/o Shri P. Rathore, R/o Viil^ge Nevsa Hardibazar Chowk, P.S. Kusmunda Tahsil ^Katghora, DistrictKorba (C.G.) 2. Depot Officer Regional Store Gevra Area S.E.C.L. Gewa,Tahsil Kafghora, DistrictKorba (C.G.) . 3. The Oriental InsyranGe Gompany Ltd. - Through Branch Manager, City Branch Office, Transpgrt Nagar, Korba (Q.G,) Mjscel)aneousaoDealunderSection173oftheMotor .< . tW*fW '• • ' L''- .••• •' ' ^ Present: Shri Goutam Khetrapal and Shri Avinash Chand Sahu, learned counsel forthe appellants. None for respondent No. Ithoughserved. Shri I. Lakra, learned counsel for respondent No.2. Shri Raj Awasthi; learned counsel for respondent No.3. ORDER Ith (12tn August,2010) The following order of the Court was passed by RajeevGupta,C.J. Thjs is Glaimants' apReal. for enhancement of the compensation awarded Isy the Additionai Motor ^ecident Glaims Tribunal, Bilaspur (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 31.08.2004, passed in Claim Case No.85/2003. , 2) The appellants/claimants, unfortunate widowand minor -^. childrenof deceased Hem Singh Gond claimed compensation of Rs9,36,800/-, byfiling a claim petition under Section 166 ofthe Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 08.08.2003, when the motorcycle bearing registration No.CG-12/ -•• • ZE-1615 on which he was trayelling as a pillion-rider was dashed by the offending vehicle Jeep bearjng registration No.CG-12/ / ' ' ' . . 7047, resuitjng in his instantaneous death onthespot itself. The ;fr- • . •' : • , ••.':.- " . . •: • . . • . . -'. • • ' • .. , claimants further pleaded that deceased Hem Singh Gond was aged about 44 yeare and used to eam Rs.75-1 OO/- per ciay as Porter/Loader. ,A '<« '^S^5k ^ss B^ . '^ '^s ' ;? li^^ 3) The owner, driverand insurer of the offending vehicle Jeep contested the claim and denied their liability to pay compensation to the claimants on the plea that tKe accident occurred due to sole negligence of the motoreyclist. The insurer took the further plea that the Jeep was being plied in breach of the pollcy conditions and the driver of the Jeep was not holding a valid driving license. 4) Before the Tribunal;the claimants examined AW-1 Smt. Khakhara Bai insupport oftheirclaim, whereasthe driver, owner and insurer ofthe Jeep did not examine any witness in rebuttal, 5) The Tribunal on a close scrutihy of the evidence ayailable on record held thaf deceased Hem Singh Gond died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 08.08.2003; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Jeep; as the offending vehicle Jeep on the dateof the accident was insured with the Orientat Insurance Company Limited, the Insurance Companywasliabletopaycompensationtotheclaimants. 6) As the respondents have not filed any appeal against the award, the,''above findings recorded by the Tribunal have now /....' ... . " . attained finality. 't • ; ^ •*' . , • • 7) TheTriburtalassessedtheincomeofthedeceasedLonthe fciasis of the:notiQnat income at Rs.15,000/- per annum; By (|edyGtingiy3 of Rs.15,QOQ/-towardsthepersoria|expehsesof the j deceased, _jhe_claimants' dependency was assessed at ^/"..^^, 4 \. j Tf Rs.10,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.10,000/- with the multiplier of 15, the compensation was worked out to Rs.1,50,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.13,000/- under other heads, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,63,000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Hem Singh Gond in the motor aocident. The Tribunal further directed payment of intereston the above amount of compensation of Rs.1,63,000/- @ 6% per annum from the date offiiing ofthe claim petition till the date ofactual payment. 8) Shri Goutam Khetrapal and Shri Avinash Chand Sahu, learned counsel for the appellants, submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not acceptfng the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased and in assessing ,his income at Rs.15,000/- per annum only; in selecting the lower multiplier of 15; and in awarding lowcompensation of Rs.1,63,000/- only. 9) Shri Raj Awasthi, learned counsel for respondent No.3 the Oriental Insurance Company Limited, on the other hand, supported the award and contended {hat the compensation of Rs.1,63,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances ofthe presentcase. 10) Shri l. Lakra, learned counsel for respondent No.2 owner of ^ • • . •• . ' -"' . .' the offending yehicle Jeep also supported theaward. 11) In a motor accident claim case, what is important isi that, the compensation to be awarded by the Courts/Tribunals should tee just and propercompensation in the facts and circumstances ^. of the case. It should neither be a meager amount of compensation,noraBonanza. 12) Nowwe shalt examine as to whether thecompensation of Rs.1,63,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in thefactsand circumstancesofthepresentcase. 13) Deceased Heim Singh Gond was 45 years of age on the date of the accident. The Glaimants pleaded that he used to earn Rs.75-100/- perdayas Porter/Loader. The Tribunal assessed his ineome at Rs.15,000/- per annum on the basis of the notional income prescribed in the SecondSchedute under Section 163-A ofthe IVIotorVehielesAct. ; 14) In our opinion, deceased Hem Singh Gond being aged about 45years could have easily earned Rs.70-80/- per day as an unskilled labour. We, therefore, propose to recompute the eompensation taking the income of the deceased at Rs.2,500/- permonth and Rs.30,000/-perannum. 15) By deducting the usual 10rd of Rs.30,000/- towarcts the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency isassessed at Rs.20,000/-peranRum. 16) Consjdering the age of the deceased, his widow and their /. . . '^ -:'.—'••' ,..• -•.... . ' ' : • . children,weareoftheopinionthatmultiplierof15selectedbythe Tribunal is lappropriate. in the faets and circumstances of the presentease. • : : . ' 17) By multiplyirig the annual dependency of Rs.2Q,000/- with tffe multiplier of 15, the compensation works out to Rs.3,00,000/-. -/OOO'ZS't'sy ^o uoiiBSUsduioo jo lunoiuB psoueyus S4t yo -/ooo'ersy.io issjsiui io }unoiue psi(!iuenb jsyyn^ MtiM-/OOOISI.'e'sy 0} paouequs si leunquisq) Aq papjeme -/ooo'EQ'l.'syjo uoiiesuadLuoo eyj. •)jed ui peMoiie 31 UO!}BSUedLUpO 8Ljl JO }U3LU93Ue4U8 JOJ S)UeLU!e|3/§tUB||3ddB 9i|t Aq p8|y |esdde 3i)i 'suoseej BUIODSJOJ et)} joj (( 1 •-/OOO'Sl'sy ve -^OQ'ZS'fsy jo uoiiesuediuoo jo lunoaie psoueyus 941 uo )S8je}U! p tunouje 3iQ A(!}uenb 9M 'jeueLU ei)} ui Aejsp s.iitua eqi JQJ psuieiq sq 0} )QU s] 3UO[e AuedLuoo souejnsui ey} 481;} pej aq) pue }• lesdde luessjd sqi pue uo!)i)3d iuie|o 34) jo |esodsjp ui Aeisp SL)} 6u!pn|oui J9UBLU eqtp spsdse4ueA9|8j 94} ||B Buyspisuoo (61- •.(|3St! lesdde siLjt ui p3U!tuenb eq ABLU uojtesusdujoo ^o lunoaie psouequs sqt uo }sejs}U! p }unouie eij) 'uoiiesuaduioojo lunouiB peouetjus alj} UO }S3J3}Ui SAiaOSJ 0} PS|1!1US 9JB S)UBlUjB|0 aL|i L|O!I<M Jo^ pousd 9L|} }noqe seiyed eq^ uss/wfaq sindsip eiqissod Aue P!OAB 0} MSIA e q}iM }Bq} payiLuqns ssiy^d sy} JQJ lesunoo psu-iea-i (91, •luepioos JO}OLU sq) ui puoo y6u!s ui9H pssBeoep p Miesp 84} Jo^ uojtesuaduioo se -/ooo'Sl.'e'sa 10 Luns |B}0}e SAISOSJ 0} p9|}!}U9 atuoosq 'snqi •s}ueujiB|o syi 'e}e}ss .(o sso] JQJ -/O00"s'sy P11G 'MopiM siji o) lunitjosuoojo sso| jo^ -/Ooo'S'sy 'sasuedxe iBjaun^ SpJBMOl -/QOO'9'Sy SA1303J 0} p9|t!}U3 jsqtjn^ SJB StUBlUIBIO 341 ^ ^ ;as?;.. ;'.SIt <?" yN,. -c.,'1 -^.,..,;. < 1 s^y ^^.cs^. '•''' 3ta^'' Subbu 21) Respondent No.3 The Oriental Insurance Company Llmited is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.1,65,000/- (Rs.1,52,000/- towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.13,000/- towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced "amount of compensatioh of Rs.1,52,000/-) before the concerning Claims Tribunat. 22) No order as to costs. ~^^ \—— —== Sd/- Chief Justice Y.j Sd/- R.N.Chandrakar Judge \/