sassf^v^ ,;":»,'3 ..!iJ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR DB : HON'BLE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR^INHA & HON'BLE SHRI T.P.SHARMA, J. J. MISC. APPEAL No. 01 of 2003 APPELLNT Raitu s/o Lakhamu, aged 40 years, caste-Madiya, R/o Ulanar, 1:1(18 Shambati, w/o Raitu Madiya, R/o Ulanar Tahsil-Jagdalpur, Distt. Bastar (C.G) ifaiflitB W Versus NON- 1. Suresh Mishra, s/o Ramashray APPLICANTS Mishra, aged 48 years, R/o Sargipal, P.S. Para.pa Tahsil Jagdalpur, Distt. Bastar (C.G). 2. The Oriental Insurance Coinpany Liinited, Jagdalpur through Branch Manager, Distt. Bastar (C.G). APPEAL_U/S 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT Appearance: Shri Subhash Yadav, counsel for the Appellants. Shri Ali Asgar, counsel for respondent no.2. ORAL ORDER (13.10.2008) Sunil Kuinar Sinha, J. (1) Heard on admission. (2) The appellants/claimants have filed this appeal u/s \ 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against the award dated '^ ~t»-r.- "i3'l:KS"''i^3^^i&SE:es;'-"; M.A. No.1/2003 K2 ;|t»ltlll«lr »!1:«:il!e|F 26.3.2002 passed by the First Addl. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jagdalpur, Distt. Bastar, in Claim Case No. 176/2001. (3) The appellants/claimants are the parents of the deceased Vidyadhar, who was their male child, aged about 7 years. The deceased died on 21.12.2000 when the offending truck bearing Regn. No. M.B.Y 8474 met with an accident. (4) The learned Claims Tribunal held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the offending truck by its driver and the appellants/claimants who were parents of the deceased, were entitled to receive a sum of Rs.50,000/- as compensation on account of death of the deceased in the said motor accident. (5) Shri Subhash Yadav, learned counsel for the appellants argues that a low compensation has been awarded for the death of the deceased in the motor accident. However, he has not disputed the age of the deceased etc. (6) In the matter of Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., -vs- Siied Ibrahim and others. 2007 14) T.A.C. 385 IS.Ch the Supreme Court held that "In cases of young children of tender age, in view of uncertainties abound, neither their income at. the tinie of death nor the prospects of the futa-ire increase in their income nor chances of advancement of their career are capable of proper determination on estimated basis. The reason is that at such an early age, the uncertainties in regard to their academic pursuits, achievements in' career and thereafter advancement in '\- ... ' • \life are so many that nothing can be assumed with reasonable B :li i :?!!':":;7^ ~"~l?si-^^S!3?;;iiS;.iBKe.®.Bg^i;B^^ j' ,:f y ,y M.A. No.1/2003 •SBSSS:af<r tUB certainty. Therefore, neither the income of the deceased child is capable of assessment of esdmated basis nor the financial loss suffered by the parents is capable of mathematical computation and saying all this, the Apex Court maintained the quantum of Rs.51,500/- awarded by the claims Tribunal in the said matter. (7) When we examine the facts of the case on hand with reference to the law laid down by fhe Apex Court in the matter of Syed Ibrahim and others (supra), we do not find any force in the argument advanced by learned counsel for the appellants/ claimants. (8) We are satisfied that the amount of Rs.50,000/- awarded by the Claims Tribunal is just and proper and there is hardly any scope for enhanceraent of the same. In view of this, the appeal deserves to be and is accordingly dismissed at the motion stage. i Sd/- Sunii Kumar SiBha Judge b. Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge ;ao T?' "~ :S-iE—;s—a