HIGH COURTOF JUDICATURE CHHATTISGARH: $ILASPUR (Division Bench) CORAM : Hon’bie Shri S.R. NAYAK, OJ & Hon’bie Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. (1) Ramcharan slo hari Aged 50 years, Occupation: Agricuiture (2) Nirsi Bai W/o Ramcharan a Aged about 45 years, Occupation Agriculture (3) Sukhmania Wdlo Late Naharlai Aged about 23 years, (4) Gopal s/o late Naharlal Aged about 2 years. No.4 mlnor Through: Naturai Guardian Mother Sukhmania Bai All by caste Kumhar, Rlo Villag Devnagar (Kumharpara) P.S. & Tahsil Surajpur District: Surguja (CG). (1) hunnulal S/o Jagatram C Caste ond, Aged about 37 years. Occupation: Service, Peon (Hostel Ramanujgani) Rio Tivaraguda, P.S. Ramanujnagar, Tahsil: Surajpur District: urajpur (CG) (2) The Unlted ndla Insurance Co. Ltd. Through Branch Manager, Ram Mandir Road, Ambikapur District Surguja (CG) Present: Mr. D.N. Prajapati, learned counsel for the appellants. a ORAL ORDER (Passed on _T__-_ 28 of November 2005) meow Misc. APPEALNO.480 OF 2005 No Appellants e VERSUS G S Resgondents l r\ “2-— The following Order of the Court was passed by S.R. Nayak, CJ: This appeal arises out of a death case. Leamed counsel appearing for the appellants would contend that in assessing the loss of dependency the Tribunal is not justified in taking the annual income of the deceased at Rs.18,000/-. According to the learned counsel, the deceased was earning monthly income of Rs.4,000/- having worked as helper to Raj Mistri. (2) We have carefully perused the impugned award. tn para 12 .of the award, it is pointed out by the Tribunal that though PW—1 in his examination in chief stated that the deceased was working with him and he was earning daily income of Rs.100/-, in his cross examination he admitted that the deceased was earning between Rs.30-40/- per day and thattoo for 20—25 days in a month. Nevertheless, the Tribunal in fairness has taken the annual income of the deceased at Rs.18,DOO/- for the purpose of assessing loss of dependency. Therefore, it cannot be said that what is awarded under the head of loss of dependency, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the absence of any substantive legal evidence, is arbitrary or unreasonable. The appeal is devoid of merit. lt is accordingly dismissed, however, with no costs. sm- Sd/- Sadsh K. Agnihw‘l Chief Justice Judge ' / C. Bralesh" Judge "