HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DiVISjONBENCH i'BLE WR. ViJAY KUMAR HON'BLE MR. DHIRENDRA STAVA JJ (? ISCELLANEOUS APPEAL 3.105 OF 2007 1. A. Babu Rao, son of Jagannath Naidu, aged 48 years. 2. Smt. Laxmi, wifeof A. Babu Rao, aged 41 years. 3. Ku. Jaya, daughter of A. Babu Rao, aged 22 years. Al] residents of New Khursipar, Bhilai-12, P.S. Chawni, Behind Soap Factory, Tehsil & District Durg (C.G.) Vs. RESPONDENTS 1. Harish Chandra, son of Firanta Ram, aged 32 years, resident of Shivaji Nagar, New Khursipar, Bhiiai, P.S. Chawni, Tehsii & DistrictDurg(C.G.) 2. Sukhvinder Singh, son of Mangal Singh, resident of Shop N0.45, Sector-5, Bhilai Nagar, Teh. & Distt. Durg. 3. Divisional Manager, National Insurance Company Ltd., Branch Office Supeta, Bhilai, Teh. & Distt. Durg. Present : Mr. Amiyakant Tiwari, iearned counsei for the appellants. OPAL ORDER (Passed on 29th January, 2007) Following ora! order ofthe Court was passed bv Viiav Kymar Shrivastava. ^ This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (henceforth "the Act, 1988") has been preferred against award dated 1.9.2006 passed by the 12 Additionai Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Durg (henceforth "the Tribunat") in Claim Case No.60/05 whereby a compensation of Rs.4,36,500/- has been awarded in favour ofthe appellants, feeling aggrieved this appeai for enhancement of compensation amount. 2. On 14.2.2005, when A. Shekhar Rao (since deceased) was going in his motorcycle bearing registration number C.G.07/4136, he met an accident with vehicle bearing registration number CG07-ZC-21 17. The driver of the offending vehicte was respondent No.1, owner of it was respondent No.2 and it was insured with respondent No.3. A. Shekhar Rao sustained injuries and succumbed to it. Appeliants No.1 to 3, who are father, mother and sister of deceased respectively, filed an application under Section 166 ofthe Act, 1988 for compensation. Vehicle owner-respondent No.2 remained ex-parte and others contested the claim. 3. After evaluating the evidence, learned Tribuna! awarded the compensation as befow:- 1. Loss of dependency : 2. Funera! expenses : 3. Loss of affection : Rs.4,32,000/- Rs. 2,000/- Rs. 2,500/- Rs.4,36,500/- 4. Leamed counsel for the appellants contended that tearned Tribuna! has committed error by fixing notional income of deceased as against iegal evidence available on record to prove it. He further contended that the Tribunal has aiso committed error by deducting 1/3 of deceased's income towards his own expenses. 5. Admittedly, the employer to establish the income of deceased has not been examined. One certificate i.e. Ex.P-10 was obtained after the incident but that was also not proved by any legal evidence. Despite that learned Tribunal accepting the evidence that deceased was working in Jain Trading Company allowed his monthly income as Rs.3,000/- and after deducting 1/3rd of the income of deceased, as his expenses, assessed annual dependency Rs.24,000/-. Learned Tribunal appiied multiplier of 18 and assessed total dependency Rs.4,32,000/-. Here pertinent to mention that claimants are father, mother and one adult sister, therefore in such circumstances, the age of deceased is irrelevant for selecting multiplier. In absence of any objection or appeal at this juncture we are not inclined to adjudge and declare the correct muKiplier. When income of the deceased was not established by cogent evidence and learned Tribunal very fairty allowed the income of deceased, a person who was educated only upto 10'^ standard, as Rs.3,000/- per month, that cannot be said to be illegal. So far deduction of 1/3 of income made by the Tribunal on dsceased's own expenses is concerned, that in facts and circumsfances of the case appears to be just and reasonabte. Finding of facts recorded by the Tribunal regarding dependency and 1/3 deduction does not appear to be illegal or perverse, which may call for any interference. 6. No other points have been raised during the course of arguments. 7. !n the result,Jhe_aBpeal being davoid of substance is dismissed in limine. Sd/- V.K.Shrivastava Judge Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge Roshan/-