^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Misc. Appeal No. 1082 of 2005 APPELLANTS Smt. Rewti Soni and another. RESPOJ^DENTS Versus Smt. Sukhvindar Kaur and others. •< •\. .<. AWARD For consideration 1 -11-2011 Hon'ble Shri Justice Raieev Gupta _9 ^x^rr^^ ' Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- N. K. Agarwal Judge Post for pronouncement ofAward: '^.. ^ -11-2011 Sd/- N. K. Agarwal Judge HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M.A.No.1082 of 2005 APPELLANTS Claimants 't' -Y- ,-^ RESPONDENTS 1. Smt. Rewti Soni, W/o Shri Manik Chand Soni, aged about 37 years, 2. Manikchand Soni, S/o Shri Ghasiram Soni, Aged about 41 years. Sardar Baldev Singh, agedabout2 1/^ years, Both R/o Near Janak Dev Mishra Niwas, Behind Indira BiharColony, Bandhawapara, Bilaspur (C.G.) VERSUS 1. Smt. Sukhvindar Kaur, W/o Shri Amrit Singh Dhillan, Aged about 62 years, R/o Shyamnagar, Near Santoshi Mandir, Raipur (C.G.) Through Shri Bachettar Singh, S/o Sabeg Singh, Aged about 30 years, R/o Shyamnagar, Near Santoshi Mandir, Raipur (C.G.) (Owner). 2. Taturam, S/o Shri Rajaram, R/o Sanjay Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) (Driver) 3. The Oriental Insurance Compnay Limited, Branch Office No.2-A, Shri Mahavir Gaushala, Parisar, Mauhadapara, Raipur (C.G.) (Insurer) (APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT. 19881 (DB: Hon'ble Mr. Raieev Gupta. C.J. & Hon'ble Mr. N.K. Aaarwal. J.) Present : Shri Prak-ash Mishra, counsel for the appellants. Shri Sudhir Agrawal and Shri P. Dutta, counsel for respondent No. 3. AWARD (Deliveredon S. /11/2011) Per N.K. Agarwal, J; 1. This is claimants' appeal seeking enhancement in the compensation awarded by the Member, Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur (for short 'the ^T-^ -^ ..* >- -^ -!^» Tribunal') vide award dated 26 June, 2004 passed in Claim Case No. 21/2002. As against the compensation of Rs.50,00,0007- claimed by the unfortunate parents of deceased - Sandeep Kumar Soni @ Sunny by filing application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'the MV Act') for his death in the motor accident 03.02.2002, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,12,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 9 percent per annum from the date of application till its actual payment. The Tribunal, on a close scrutiny of the evidence led, material placed and submissions made by the parties, held: the accident had occurred due to rash and negligent driving ofTruck bearing registration No.M.I.T.9413 by its driyer i.e. respondent No.2/Taturam; Sandeep Kumar Soni @ Sunny died on account of injuries sustained in the said accident; respondent No. 3/the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. liable to pay compensation as it could not establish violation of policy conditions; assessed and awarded tathe claimants a total sum of Rs.1,12,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 9 percent per annum from the date of application till its actual payment. Shri Prakash Mishrajearned counsel appearing for the appellant, would submit: the amount of compensation of Rs.1,12,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is shockingly on lower side. /y^'^ ;.a__ 1 1"••••»fc^ -1; -•^1 '.* .-<" •^. ..',^ ^ 5. Per contra, Shri Sudhir Agrawal and Shri P. Dutta, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.S/The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. supported the award and submitted: in the facts and circumstances of the case, the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation which does not call for any interference. 6. We have heard the counsel appearing for the parties, perused the order impugned and record of the Tribunal. 7. The deceased was a boy of 14 years and was a brilliant student, as per finding of the Tribunal. The Tribunal, instead of taking into consideration the notional income of the deceased as prescribed in Second Schedule to Section 163-A of the MV Act, has certainly erred in awarding lump-sum compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- on account of loss of dependency to the claimants. 8. The accident had occurred in the year 2002. The notional income of Rs.15000/- per annum was prescribed in the Second Schedule under Section 163-A ofthe Motor Vehicles,.Act in the year 1994. The accident in the present case, wherein deceased Sandeep Kumar Soni @ Sunny lost his life, took place in the year 2002. If the increase in the prices of the essential commodities and the cost of living between the year 1994 and the year 2002, the year of accident in the present case,are taken into consideration, the notional income of Rs.15000/- ..^"••^ |sa^^ ^.y ^ -^' '.* v .<••' x.''.^ prescribed in the Second Schedule in the year 1994 would certainly come to Rs.30,000/- in the year 2002. We, therefore, propose to re-compute the compensation taking the notional income ofthe deceased at Rs.30,000/- perannum. 9. The appellants/claimants in the present case are parents of deceased. After deducting 50% of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses as held by Apex Couri: in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt.) and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another, (2009) 6 SCC 121 wherein deduction of one-half is prescribed in case of parents being claimants, the claimants annual dependency is assessed at Rs.15,000/-. In view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay vs. Laxman lyer & another, (2003) 8 SCC 731 wherein it was held that in those cases where the claimants are the parents of the deceased, the multiplier should never exceed 10, multiplier of 10 would be appropriate in the facts and <?ircumstances of the case. By multiplying the claimants' annual dependency with the multiplier of 10, the compensation towards loss of dependency is worked out to Rs. 1,5.0,0007-. The claimants are further entitled for a sum of Rs.10,000/- on the other heads (Rs.5000/- for loss of estate and Rs.5,000/- for funeral expenses). •..•^. l«^^y ^ ^a^ ^. 10. Therefore, the appeal is allowed in part. The appellants are awarded a total sumof Rs.1,60,000/- as compensation in place of Rs.1,12,000/- as awarded by the Tribunal. The appellants are further entitled to get. Rs.4,000/- towards quantified interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.48,000/-. The award is modified to the above extent. Rest of the conditions of the award shall remain intact. 11. Respondent No.S/the Oriental Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time to deposit Rs.52,000/- (Rs.48,000/- towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.4,000/- towards quantified interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.48,000/-) before the concerned Claims Tribunal. 12. No order as to costs. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- '^•K.Agarwaf Judge •^'•^