sm ^W:-..'i ^'- VW^M^ii UJSIIIft^-13^ BBIJNii^1!^ ·IK.il JiSII:;II^I:' !Bai-r|. W!m'^ BSi-1 SK^'S SSSit iJBBIJBIII' ifi K HtGllcQURTOFCHH^^IStSAI^^BIIi.AS^ { blVlSlbNBENCHiit COI^M: HON'BLESHRII^ HON'Bt.ESHRISUNIL^UjVIARS(NN^,J. ADpellant^ Claimant! Respondtents/ Non-aDDlicarrts M.A.No. 446 of 2002 Devaki Bai wd/b RQtnesh N/erma, aged about 191years, R/o. j Village Ghorbhathi Post KharQra^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Kharora, DJStrictRaipur(C.G.) VERSUS 1 Suresh Kumar Sen S/o. ©anQShram Sen R/o. Village l\4aja^^ Gariyabandh, d1strictRaJpur(G.<3.) 2 Mohammed f^izwan^^^ N A.R. Meman, N^ Road, Gariyabartd, ciistrict Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 3 United 1ndia Snsurance C6. LAd, Circle Office, Krishna Complex, KachhariRoad,Raipur(C.G.) BtBK mm ^i^M •SM; SHI IttK IHB: I'N'Hltll BB 1188 iSm B?l^;!;' ^;J^:@l^^:^.i.^;^X1: ApDeal urider Section 173 of the Motor Vehictes Act Present: Shri S.C. Verma and Shri A.L.. Singraul, learned counsetfortheappeltant. l NoneforresporidentsNo.1&2thougtiservecl. Shri H.B. ^grawal, teamed Senior Counser^w^^^^^ J.K.Gupta;leamedcounse{forrespondentNp.3. ;:-OI^ER1..,,',1 '•':\;:'1.,.;^ (17th June, 2010) i-.::. '• - ••• th^ foltowing ordef o^ the Court was jpassed by Ra|eev (^upta, C.J. Thls is claimant's appeal for enhanceraent ofcoryensation awarcleciiby the First Additional Motor Accident Claims Trjbunat, li'i;S..i m MS Bi;iw:S- %!1:l^j^i.:- itl K^ w i^ Raipur (for sJiort 'the Tribunal') vide awardj idated 30.01 .|002, :;h::l..'-''-.l.l^-::.:-•.,. passed in Claii{n Gase No.08/2001. H j 2 As aga nst the compensation of Rs 5,i4,o6o/- claim^d |by the appellant/ claimant, unfortunate widow of! jdeceased R^mesh Vertna^ by filir^fa claira petition under Sectioril163^ o^ Vehicles Act, fer his death 1n the motor accidenti pn 1 1.02.2001, the T i11^-" '• •••.•,".-1 "' .' . '•. "'•-:• . ...•. :' •'-• 1^1/' / :. 1: Tribunal awarded; a total sum of Rs.1,75,000/- as compensafion along with interest @ 9% per annym from the Sdate offljing ofW clajm pefitiontil|;thedateofactualpayment. 3. For the death of appellant's husband cieceased Ramesh Verma, compenisatiQn of Rs.3,70,000/- was separately sought by 'l^"."'.-. 11:.'..'-./:'1-.''11-'.-^.:''..;^ hisparentsandsisterbyfilinganotherdajmpetitionwhichcameto beregisteredasMotQrAccJdentClajmCase N0.10/2001 andwas decided by the Tribunal by the same impugned award dated 30.01.2002...•./il:,^:llll.;.,:-..;:::'^ 4. The Tribunal orr a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held fhatdeceased RameshVermadied on accountpfthe in|uries sustained by him in the motor accident on 11.02.2001; the accident occurred dueto rash and negligent dnving ofthe driverof the offending ^ehicle IVtetador bearing registratjon No.MR23-D- 8301; and as the offending vehicle Metador on the date of ^ accident was iinsured with the United India Insyrance Company Umited,thelnsuranceCompanywasliabletopaycompensaliionto theclaimant. ~T;':i'"33°?'''ro:S?^ SWIft"®^.,-; '^m^K ";.:::;;'';.'•'.;' ilffi B9iiB'JJ.:ffi^ t'jji '[ ^. ^s the re^pQndents have not lllecl any^^^^ award, the abd^e findings recorded by the^^^ ^ ''•i''."'11 '•.-••'/:'. ::'1 .::( .•-,:. ".••^•' ' '''••' ':..'..';'.::.l'"'':.-;.^^;'l^ attainedfinality:| 6; The Iribt|in^ Rs.1^500/- per r^onth and RS.18,000/- per annu^ 1/3FdjQf Rs.18 <w- t(^rds the percona1^^ the the deceased,theclaimant^dependency^wasassessedat^ per anriym. Byjmultiplying the annua! dependency of^ with the multipljejr of 14, the c^ Rs.1,68,000/-, |By awarding further sym o^^^^ funera! ^pens^jand Rs.5,000/-forlQS&^^^^^^ the Triburial awarcled a total sum of Rs,1 ^5,000/- as cpmpensation to the claimant. The Tribunal fyrtherdirected paymentp^ on tfte above amoynt ofcompensation pf Rs.'1,75,000/-@ Q% per annum from the idate of filing of the claim petition till •actualpayment..,].-,'-.,,' •:,. .;..','rl'; •'•--•.-••''i:'-:.'1'-:..^ 7. Shri SC Verma and Shri AL Singraul, learneci counsel ^or the appellant submitted that the Tribunal has erred in selecting the lower multiplier of 14 and in awarding low cpmpensatjon of ^s.1,75,OOQ^-Qnl:y..:;:^.!''^ 8. Shri H.Bv Agrawal, learned Senior Counsel fbr respondent^ No.3- the Unitedl hand supported the award and contended that fhe Tribunat^^h^ been quite liberal as'compehsationi India Insurance Company 1-imited prvthe crther in awarding substantial amount GfRs.1,75,000/- tbthe claimant. •'^' ii M' ;;. ^.^1''-. •?3:'"S?2';?Sy?.3:?; SsffiM ^m^W- •••M^^: IB^'I BffiBijl^J:; mii^ ji^i. H'l 1 9. jSo far a9 tie assessment of the income 6f| the deceasec( by the ^ribunal at ps.1,500/- per month and Rs.18jOQO/- per anra^ and the claimant's dependency at Rs.12,000/- per annum, we do not find any infir|mity. We, therefore, affirrri the assessment oll the incomeofthedeceasedbythe^ribunalatRs.18,C)00/"perarinum andtheclatmanf'sdepehdencyatRs.12,000/-periannum. ^O. The Tribunal certainly has fellen jnto errbr in selecting the muttiplier of 14, Deceased Ramesh Verma was aged about 20 years^on the date of the aceident and his widow, claimant Devkibai was 19 years ol age. In our opinion, appropriafe multiplier in. the :^('['\i'\^'':.-'i^-:':i'^ .•. ,i/l/ •:'," :11:'1!^ presentcase,tlierefore,wouldbe 18. 11. On due corisidergtion ofthe submissionsof leamed counsel ffbr the parties artid the relevant factors and the above mentioned broadfeaturesofthecase/weaFeoftheopinionthatfurtheraward iOf Rs;51 ;000/- inclusive of interest cQmponent on the enhanced amount of compensation would make the compensation of Rs.1,75,000/- awarded by the Tribunat as just and proper compensgtion inthe factsandcircumstancesofthepresentcase. 12. The appea! filed by the appellant / claimant for enhancement of the compensation, therefore, is ajloWed in part. The appellant / claimant is awaryed further sum of Rs.51,000/- inclusive of interest component on t|ie enhanced amount of compensation; in adclition tothesumQfR^.1,75^00/-awardedbytheTribunal. ^il •;1j^;^^^ li:r:U Q K~'it Subbu •;tii li.j' II! 14. Theent 13.] Respon<|lent No.3 The United India Insurance Company Limited is gr^nted three months' time for depositm^^^^ •, Rs.51,000/-b^f6retheconcerningclaimsTribunal. re ambunt 6f Rs.51,000/- now awarded in this eippeal shall be disfc^ursed to appellant Devkibai, Widow of deG^ased RameshVermaandtheotherclaimantsshallnotbeentitleditOget any share fromthis amoynt of Rs.51,000/-. 15. No order as to costs. Sd/- Chief Justice .>> Sd/- i;.::.,.., Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge