IN THE fflGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH MISELLANEOUSAPPEAL(C)NQ.—<2>^)3> OF 2010 (MEMORANBUM OF AFPEALUNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLESACT, 1988) APPELLANT ^ .s- ^The Divisional IVlanager, The New India Insurance Company Limited, Through, ?-'y\'" C//J^Divisional Manager, Divisional Office, Infront .'^^t.Q/^^' of Rajiv Plazza, Near Bus Stand, Bilaspur, ...-^ h^sa*' of Rajiv Plazza, Near -*. •S>^\.1^^' District- Bilaspur(C.G,) f.fy ' •i~ /Tk.T—_—__11 SPONDENTS (Non-applicant No. 2) VERSUS Lakfamm Bai Rajak W/o Gayaram Rajak, Aged abourt 40 years, (AppUcant/Claimant No. 1) Gayaram Rajak S/o Dukhiram Rajak, Aged about 44 years, (Applicant/CIaimant No. 2) Both R/o Village - Bhathri, Police Station - Takhatpur, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) 3y^ Amit Agrawal S/o Satyanarayan Agrawal, R/o - Village - Barela, Police Station - Takhatpur, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) (Non-applicant No. 1) Appeal Value at - Rs. 4,39,000/- OF' MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL UNDERSECTION ACT, 1988 THE MOTOR VEHICLES HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR M.A. (C)No.263of2010 •y. Appellant The Divisional Manager, The New India Insurance Company Limited Versus Respondents Lakhmin Bai Rajak & others APPEAL UNDERSECTION_173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT.1988 DB: Hon'ble Shri Justice I. M. Quddusi 8s Hon'ble Shh Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Shri Shivendu Pandya, Advocate for the appellant. Shri Goutain Kheft-apal, Advocate for the respondents No. 1 and 2. Ms Annpuma Ku. Singh, Advocate for the respondent No.3. ORDER(Oral) ( Passed on this 23rd day of March, 2011 ) Perl. M. Quddusi, J. 1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant/Insurance Coinpariy on the ground pf liability and quantum against the impugned : award dated 11.12.2009, passedbythe8tbMotorAccidenf Claims ' 'TnbunaI (FTC), Bilaspur in Claim CaseNo. 16/2009, awarding a sum of Rs. 4,39,000/- along with interesf @ 6% per annum, *> holding the appellant/Insurance Cpmpany as liable to pay the amoynt of compensadon. 2. . We have heard leamed counsel appearing for the parties and perused the lower Court reeord as well as the findings given in the -impugned award. 3. Brief facts, in nutshell, are that on 10.7.2008 deceased Pappu alias Dharmendra was refurning to Takhatpur from Bilaspuf after getting the repairing work done of the Jeep, bearing registration a^'FT" BM No. C.G. 10-ZA/0464. On the way an unknown bus, which was being diiven in a rash and negligent manner by its driver, hitthe Jeep, as a result of which deceased Pappu received grievous injuries and later on succumbed to those injuries. The rnatter was reported in the Police Station Chakarbhata. 4. The claimants, being legal heirs ofthe deceased, filed a claim case under Section I63-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for award of a total compensation of Rs. 14,25,000/- under various heads. '5. Wifh regard to liability fixed by the Tribunal to pay compensation upon the appellant/Insurance Company, no evidence has been produced that there was breach of the conditions of the insurance policy. The claim petition was filed under Section 163-A oftheAct, 1988 and it is not disputed that the vehicle was insured with the appellant, therefore, as there is no evidence regarding breach of the conditions of the insurance policy, the insurance conipany has rightly been held liable to pay the amount ofcompensation. 6. In view ofthe above the contention regarding wrQngly fixing the liability upon the appellant/Insurance Conipany is not sustainable and this eontention is rejected. 7. With regard to the quantum, the second schedule has been given .in cases of claims filed under Section 163-A of the Act, 1988. The deceased was aged about 25years i.e. not exceeding 25 years therefore, treating his income as Rs. 36,000/- per annuin after deducting l/3rd towards his personal and living expenses the remainder Rs. 24,000/- is to be muldplied wifh 17 asit is applicable according to the second schedule but the Tribunal has wrorigly applied the multiplier of 18. Therefore, the total amount towards loss ofdependency comes to Rs. 4,08,000/-_Besides this, 8. 9. 10. 11, 12. :; according to the seeond schedule the claimants would be entitled to get Rs. 2000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs. 2,500/- towards loss of estate. Thus, the total compensation comes to Rs. 4,12,500/-. In view ofthe above, the amount calculated by fhe Tribunal is excessive. The claimants are entitled to getRs. 4,12,500/- from the appellsint Insurance Company along with sunple interest at the rate of 6% per annum. The penal ihterest awarded by the Tribunal at the rate of 9% per annum is not proper and therefore that part of the award is set aside. The rest of the conditions of the impugned award shall remain intact. The cross appeal/objection (I.A.No.2) filed by the claimants is dismissed as withdrawn. Accordiogly, we allow this appeai iri part, reduce the amount of CDmpensation and modify the unpugned award dated 11.12.2009 to fhe above extent. No order as to costs. Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge Thalair