HISH COURT OF CHHATTI56ARH AT SILASPUR MVISION BENCH HON'BLE SHRI JA6MSH BHALLA. Ag. CJ. & HON'BLE SHRI &ILIP ftAOSAHEB ISESHMUICH, J. Miscellcneous Appaa! (O No. 758 of 2007 1. ttanohar Roo 6aikwad, C9ed about 50 y'ears, S/o. iate teadhav Rao Saikwad. 2. Smt. Pushplflta Saikwad, aged about 45 years, W/o. Shri A?>anohar Rao Saikwad, R/o. Kududand. P.S. Civii Lines, P.0. & bigtt. Biiaspu". VERSUS RESPON&ENTS : NON-APPLICAN75 1. Kcjendra Sahu, S/o galiram Sahu, R/o Kehoka, Bajrangpara, P.0. Bhiiai, Distt. &urg (C.6.) Driver of the Bus No. C.6. - 07-E/0342. 2. i1A/s Clurg Bus Servlce Through : (Aanager 6.E. Road, P.0. & OisTT. Durg (C.6.) 3. The Nekv India Insurance Co. Ltd. burg Through : Branch Officer, Br'anch teanager, Rajiv Plaza, Bus Stand, P.0. & t5istt.Bilaspur(C.6.) teiscellgneoys A&peaLynder Sectjon 173 of_ttiotor Vehicle Act. 1988 Present: Shri B.R. Shosh with Smt. AAeera Jaiswal counsel for the appeltants. ORAL OR&ER (Passed on 09th July, 2007) The following oral order of the Court was passed by Dilip Rcosaheb Deshmukh. J. Heard. - ti/tnt- The following points urged by learned coungel for the appel!ants in this appeel for enhancement of compensation in a case of accidental decth of one Ku. Vargha Saikwad, aged about 28 years:- ,. /' (a) That the multiplier 13, applied by ths Tribunai was incorrect. (b) That the monthly income assessed by the learned Tribunai istoo low. Having considered the contentions raised by learned counsei for the appeliants we find that the age of the appellants / claimants who are father and mother of the deceased is 50 yaars and 40 years r'espectively. Therefore, c' average age wouid come approximately 48 years and, therefore, learned Tribunal correctly appiisd multiplier of !3. As regards, month!y income is concerned; it is not disputed by learned counsel for the appeliants that no documentary evidence is adduced before the Tribunal relating to income of the deceased. Appellant No. 1 father of the deceased in his evidence deposed that the deceased wou!d have earned approximately betiveen Rs.4,000/- to 5,000/- from computer work every month. The Tribunai has accepted this statement and assessed loss of dependency taking into consideration income of the deceased as Rs.4,000/- per month. It is also to be noted that the deceased was an unmarried girl and would have soon got married and that both the claimants i.e. parents were earning members of the family. In the facts and circumstancas, we are of the considered opinion that there is no me"it in the contention advanced by the tearned counsel for the appellant and compensQtion of Rs.2,64,000/- cwarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonabl^ Accordingly, there 'is no merit in this appeoi r/hich ig dismissed at ^. The stage of admission itself. pcdmtt Sd/- ActingChiefJustice DUip Raos Sd/- ludge