Sfc HIGH^C>Uf^0F?CHH^T^SGWHW DIVISIONBENCH { CORAIVI: HON'BI-ESHTORAJEEVGUI^^ HC)^BI-ESHRIRANONATHGHANDR^ Misc.^ AbDellants/ Applicants beforethe Tribunal RespondentS/ Mon-appjjeants beforethe Tribunal /•^•: ^?'. .'^' 1. Fulbai VVe!/o. t^e /^ar Sing aged about:30year^. 2, MahendraS/o; 1-ate^marSingh Diwan, aged about:09year^. 3. Dlnesh S/o. Late Amar Singh Djwan, agedabout:07year§. j. 4. Ftohini D/Q. L^ (:!age^labout^03-years.^l.::- ;! '/' ,••• '•• •••.•••."•.". 5. Maheswari D/o.^^^^^^^ L Diwan, aged about: 1 years. .l.'l/';l !1 ' 1"1;:".1 .- ': '.' •'•.••:'. Appellarrt No. 2 and 5 ace minors guardi^n ^rQLigh tMeir mother Rulbai Wd/o. LateAmarSingh Di\A/ari N1 R/6. Batfienapara^ Dhamtari, Tahsil &Distt.Dhamtari(C.<3.) 6. Jotkunwar Bai VV/o.jArjyn SinQhkagedi about :< SO years R/Q. .Village; : Nayagaon, Tahsil j Kurud, Distt. DhiamtarJ(e.G.) ) ! ll,Versus-:'--;^:.^':l.'...|':.:'',.\^^'^ 1. ^ay Kumar^^ ^ aged 4about 27 y^ars^^^^^^^^^^R^^ Roadv N^ar Pipal Dhamtari,lDJstt.Dha|itari,(C.G.)r 2. Pir^MQhannmadiS^jAbdul^S^ ; ^ abQutSOyears.^.lRambagD , Distt. Dhamtgiri (C.G.) v •'^ 3. JThe^nental iRsurance Co^^^ AmarTa|l<ies, Dhamtari, Distt. Dhstmtari ;^C.G^,^.;,1-;1::111:.- •1€. 1 ^- MiscellaneousaDDealunderSeetion'173oftheMotor Vehicles Act. 1888 ! Present: Shri Vyay ^ appellants:.'';':':" •1^' :B ':"1::^' ,^":.':;: •1. 111 ; '1 ;:1 ':'-; 111:' ;:': Npn6forresponcientsNo. 1 &2t^pughserved, Shn SucihirAgrawal, learned counselTorrespondent :No.3.-:l.;'^/. : '1:, ',:'^ ORDER (11th August, 2010) i The fbllowing order of the Courti was passed by RajeevGupta,C.J. This is claimants' appeal for enhancement ot the !' :. '''. ''.'.'' ! ^' \ -» '• :'' '1. ' -' . ' cbmpensation awarded bythe Motor Accide|rt^ Dhamtari (for short 'the Tribunal') vide awarddated 07.05^007, passedinClaimCase N0.21/2006. | 2) AsagainstthecompensationofRs.17,50,000/-claimedby the appellants/ claimant^unfortunat)e widow,! minor children and mother of deceased Amar Singh Diwan by filing aclaim petitjon ynder Section 166ofthe Motor Vehicles Act,if6r his death in the motor accident on 23.08.2006, the Trjbunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,92,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of Vne claim petition till the date of actualpayment. 3) The Tribanal on a closesCrytm^ fc^fore it held that deceased Amar Singh Diwan diedona^^ of the injuries sustained by him in the mptor accjdent pn 23.08.2006; theacpidentpccurredduetorashandnegligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle iMaturi Van bearing registration NO.CG-04-B-1483; as the offending vehicle Maturi Van on the date of the accident was jnsur^d With the Oriental Insuranee Company Limited, the Insurance Gompany was liabte to pay compensation to the claimants. j 4) As the respondents have not filed any appeal against the award, the above findings recorded by thej Tribunal have now attainedfinality. | 5) The Tribunal assessed the income pf the deceased at Rs.15,000/- per annym. By deducting 1/3rd of Rs.15,000/- towards the personal expenses bfthe dece^sed, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.10,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.10,000/- with the multiplier ,of 17, the compensation was worked out to Rs.1,70,000/-. By awarding further sum pf Rs.22,000/- under other heads, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,92,p00/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Amar Singh Diwan in the motor accident. iThe Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation ofRs.1,92,000/- @ 6% perannum from thedate of riling of the claim petition till the date c»factual payment. r- 6) Shri Vijay Kumar Sahu, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the claimants' evidisnce about the income of the deceased and in s. ^iait ;.^- 1k n assessing his income afr Rs.15,000/- per annum only; and in awarding lowcompensatiori of Rs.1,92,000/- bnly. 7) Shri Sudhir Agrawal, leamed counsel for respondent No.3 the Oriental Insurance Company Limited on the other hand supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.1,92,000/- awarded by the Tribunal js just and^^^^^^^p^ compensation in the faGts and circumstances 6f thepresent case. 8) tn a motor accident claim case, what js important is that, the compensation to be awarded by the Courts/Tribunals should be just and proper compensation in the facts jand circumsfarices of the case. It should neither be a meager amount of compensation, nor a Bonanza. j 9) Now we shall examine as to whether ttte compensation of Rs.1,92,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and^^^ p compensation in the facts and circumstances 6f the present case. 10) True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Amar Singh Diwan used to earn Rs.5,000/- per month jas Driver, but the evidence led in that behalf was not of clinching natyre. We, therefore, do not find any fault in ttie approach of the Tribunal in discarding the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased. 11) Nevertheless, the income of the deceased assessed by the -Tribunal at Rs45,000/-perannumintheyear2006iscertainlyon •^: the lower side and requires recpnsideration. I ^- 12) Section 163-A of the Act where-uhder the Second Schedulewasintroducedintheyear1994readsasfollows: "[163A. Special provisions as to jpayment of compenisation on structured formula basis.—(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or in any other law for the time being in fbrce |or instrument having the fbrce of law, the owner of the jmotor vehicle or the authorised insurer shall be liable|to pay jn the case of death or permanent disablement due to accjdent arising out of the use of motor vehicle, compensation, as indicated in the Second Schedule, to the legal heirs or the victim, as the case may be. Explanation - For the purposes of this sub-section, "permanent disability" shall have the same meaning and extent as in the Workmen's Cpmpensation Act, 1923 (8 of 1923). i (2) In any claim for compensation under sub-- section(1), the claiaiant shall not be required to plead or establish that the death or permanent disablement in respect of which the claim has been made was due to any wrongful act or neglect or default ofthe owner of the vehicle or vehicles concerned or of any other person. j (3) The Central Government may, keeping in view the cost of living by notification in the pffieial Gazette, from time to time amend theSecond 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 thecost of living, .Yl..,.''.;;.'/'/.::/;:l'.:.;'-:.';^^ '.''''-•':'.: •^^1-^'1^ 14) As- the Central Government has failed in amendihg the Second ScheduleasprovidedinSub-section (3) ofSection163-A ^ ^'/ ,\.-i- oftheAd.theCourts/Tnbunalcantakejudicialnoticeqfinc^ inthepricesofessentialcommodjtiesandthei'costoflivingduring the pertod between the introduetion of the Second Schedule m theyear1994andthedateofaccidentinthegivencase. 15) Now reverting to the present case, the unfortunate aecident wherein deceased Amar Singh Diwan lost his iife tpok place in the year 2006. If the increase in the prices of the essential ;j;.":'..:1- commodities and the cost of Ijving between the year 1 994and the year 2006 are taken into consideration, the |notional income of Rs.15,000/- prescribed inthe Seconci Schedule inthe year 1994 would certainly come to Rs.36,000/-^^^^^^m therefore, propose to recompute the comp^nsatjon taking the incQmeofthedeceasedatRs.36,000/-perannym. 16) By deducting theusual 173rd of Rs.3Q,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency is assessed at Rs.24,000/- per annum. v 17) Considering the age of the deceased, his widow, their chjldren and motherofthe deceased.we areiofthe opinionthat multiplierof15wouldbeapprQprJateinthepresentcase. r'. ' • '• : ^' .i 18) By multiplying the anhual dependency of Rs.24,000/- with themultiplierof15,thecompensationworksouttoRs.3,60,OOQ/-. The claimant? are further entitled to receive Rs.5,000/- towards 1'uneral expenses; Rs.5,000/- for loss of consortium to the ^dow; •^' •.•'•:::.. and Rs.5,000/- fo^ Ipssofestate; The claimants,thus, become entjtted to receive a total sym pf Rs.3,75,QOO/- as compensatiorT for the death of deceased Amar Singh Diwan in the motor accident. 19) Leamed counsel forthe parties submitted that with a view to avoid any possible dispute between the iparties about the period for which the claimants are entitled to receive interest on t,: 1 the enhanced amount of 6ompensation, the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation may be quantified in this appeal itself. 20) Considering all the relevant factors inclucling the delay in disposal of the claim petition and the present appeal and the fact that theJnsurance Company alone is not to be blamed for the entire delay in the matter, wequantifytheamountofintereston the enhanced amount of compensation ofi Rs.1,83,000/- at Rs.17,00(y-. ! 21) For the foregoing "reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants/ claimants for enhanGement of the compensation is allowed in part. The compensation ofRs.1,92,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.3,75,000/- with further quantified amount of interest of Rs.17,000/- on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.1,83,000/-. 22) Respondent No.3 The Oriental Insurance Company Limited ( '-^''•-/'' ' ' • .' 1 -'1";'' • ^';'./.. .'il\'" . •' ^ ..i.1'^.." •'';1 .'';.•''-. \ .'1^-.;',1' •.•''/ is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.2,00,000/- ,(Rs.1,83,000/- towards enhanced amount of compensation + vRs.17,000/- towards quantified amount of .^^\;'-. ^M ^^^^. ^KS;i^SiiSiSi{SSSSS@Kii9!9S^^SSiSSSSiiiSSSi^ interest on the enhanced amount ofi compensation of Rs.1,83,000/-)beforetheconcerningClaimsTribunal. 23) No order as to costs. SdA ChiefJustice mmmi Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar ^ Judge ^? "l