n HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAhfl: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J. Misc. Appeal (Cl No.666 of 2008 Appellants Claimants Respondents Non-applicants Chandan Prasad, S/o Late Suklal Tamboli, Aged about 75 years Suhawan Bai, W/o Chandan Prasad, Aged about 70 years Radha Bai, Wd/ of Late Het Ram Tamboli, Aged about 40 years Kamlesh Kumar S/o Late Hetram Tamboli, Aged about 21 years Ku Rupa, D/o Late Het Ram Aged about16 years Ku Lalita, D/o Late Het Ram, Aged about14years Ku Janki D/o Late Het Ram Tamboli, Aged about 10 years Appellants No.5 to 7 through legal guardian mother Radha Bai Tamboli All are residents of village Sakreli, Police Station : Baradwar, Tahsil Sakti, District Janjgir - Champa (CG) VERSUS Manharan Kumar S/o Shiv Prasad Rathore, Aged about 21 years, Resident of village Sakreli, Police Station : Baradwar, Tahsil : Sakti, District Janjgir - Champa (CG) (Owner of the offending vehicle) Gendram, S/o Bhagirath Yadav, Aged about 25 years, Resident of \. ^' f?' &?' village Sakreli, Police Station : Baradwar, Tahsil : Sakti, District Janjgir - Champa (CG) (Driver of offending vehicle) The New India Insurance Company Ltd., 116, Rajendra Nagar Chowk, Link Road, Bilaspur (CG) The Chola Mandlam General Insurance Company Ltd., OCS 6, 2nd Floor, Super Market, Agrasen Chowk, Bilaspur (CG) ABpeaLunderSectlon VfS^of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 Present: Shri Rajesh Kumar Sharma, counsel for the appellants. None for respondents No.1 and 2 though served. Shri Sourabh Sharma and Shri Aditya Sharma, counsel for respondent No.3. ORDER (15th June, 2011) The fpllowing order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. This is claimants' appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sakti, District Janjgir Champa (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 17.08.2007, passed in Claim Case No.41/2006. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.52,55,OOO/- claimed by the appellants/ claimants, unfortunate parents, widow and children of deceased Hetram Tamboli, by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his deathon 05.02.2006 on account of the injuries sustained by him in the ^-^ 't;^ ^. ^. ^>-^-^"' ^f l-a^"' motor accident on 27.01.2006, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.3,66,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 3) The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held that deceased Hetram Tamboli died on 05.02.2006 on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 27.01.2006; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Tractor bearing registration No.CG-11A/4716; as the above offending vehicle Tractor on the date of the accident was insured with the New India Insurance Company Limited and the Insurance Company could not establish any breach of the policy conditions, the Insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimants. 4) As the respondents have not filed any appeal against the award, the above findings recorded by the Tribunal have now attained finality. 5) The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.3,000/- per month and Rs.36,000/- per annum. By deducting 1/3 of Rs.36,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.24,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.24,000/- with the multiplier of 13, the compensation was worked out to Rs.3,12,000/-. By awarding further sum of \- 4 ^ Rs. 12.000/- towards medical expenses and Rs.42,000/- under other heads, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.3,66,000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Hetram Tamboli jn the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.3,66,000/- @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri Rajesh Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased and in assessing his income at Rs.3,000/- per month and Rs.36,000/- per annum only; in deducting 1/3 ofthe income ofthe deceased towards his personal expenses; in selecting the lower multiplier of 13; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.3,66,000/- only. 7) Shri Soyrabh Sharma and Shri Aditya Sharma, learned counsel for respondent No.3, the New India Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Tractor on the other hand, supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.3,66,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 8) True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Hetram Tamboli used to earn Rs.15,000/- per month from his Jewellery shop, no cogent and reliable evidence was led before the Tribunal even to establish that the deceased was running any shop, much less Jewetlery shop. In this state ofevidence, we do not find any fault \! in the approach of the Tribunal in discarding the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased and is assessing his income on its own estimate at Rs.3,000/- per month and Rs.36,000/- per annum. 9) The deduction of 1/3 of the income of the deceased by the Tribunal towards his personal expenses, in view of the fact that there were as many as seven claimants in the case and in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt) and Others Versus Delhi Transport Corporation and another, reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121, cannot be sustained. 10) In our opinion, only 1/4 of the income of the deceased ought to have been deducted towards the personal expenses of the deceased. We, therefore, assess the claimants' dependency at Rs.27,000/- per annum by deducting 1/4th of Rs.36,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased. 11) The multiplier of 13selected by the Tribunal cannot be found fault with considering that deceased Hetram Tamboli was shown to be 46 years of age in his postmortem report and in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt) and Others Versus Delhi Transport Corporation and another,(Supra) wherein multiplier of 13 has been prescribed for the age group between 46-50 years. 12) By multiplying the annuat dependency of Rs.27,000/- with the multiplier of 13, the compfensation works out to Rs.3,51,000/-. The claimants are further entitled to receive es \ ^!:3as^ ••^ /-e'""^ 1 ^^icm^,^ ''%, ''''S^BStses"-''? m Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses; Rs.5,000/- for loss of estate; and Rs.5,000/- for loss of consortium to the widow. By adding further sum of Rs.12,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards medical expenses, the claimants become entitled to receive a total sum of Rs.3,78,000/- as compensation for the deathof deceased Hetram Tamboli in the motor accident. 13) The claimants are further awarded a sum of Rs.2,000/- towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation ofRs.12,000/-. 14) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in pari:. The compensation of Rs.3,66,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.3,78,000/- with further quantified amount of interest of Rs.2,000/- on the enhanced amount of compensation ofRs.12,000/-. 15) Respondent No.3 the New India Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.14,000/- (Rs.12,000/- towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.2,000/- towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.12,000/-) before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 16) No order as to costs. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge subbu 1