HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: Appellants HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEVGUPTA, C.J. HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J. Misc. Appeal (Cl No.381 of 2006 1 Smt Panch Kunwar, W/o Late Nepat Singh Tanwar, Aged about 56 years 2 Anshu @ Nikhil Singh Tanwar, S/o Late Santosh Singh, Aged about 5 "y'ers Both residents of Village - Morba, PS Bango, Tahsil Katghora, District Korba Respondents 5 VERSUS Laxmi Prasad, S/o Ramnath Bareth, aged 26 years, rssident of viliage Benari, Tahsil Janjgir, District Janjglr - Champa (CG) Shri Jai Narayan Singh, S/o Hardhyan Singh (Owner), Resident of KFTA. Gevra Project Dipika, SECL Branch Manager, The New India Insurance Company Limited, Branch - Korba (CG) Shri VS Parihar. S/o Late KS Parihar, resident of Qtr NoAB / 1868/70 shna Vihar, Jamnipali, District Korba (CG) Branch Manager, The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Branch Office Korba (CG) Misc. Appeal under Section 173 ofthe IVIotor Vehicles Act. 1988 Present : Shri Goutam Khetrapal and Shri Rakesh Sahu, CQunse! for the appellants. None for respondents No.1, 2 & 4 though served. Shri Shailendra Sharma, counse! fer respondent No.3. Shri P Dutta, counsel for respondent No.5. I 2 QRDER rth (17ln November, 2009) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. Learned counsel for the parties are heard on MCP.No.1907/2006, an application for condonation of the delay in filing the appeal. 2) On due consideration of the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and the grounds taken in the application, we are satisfled that the appellants have succeeded in showing sufficient cause for the delay in fiting the appeat. 3) MCP No.1907/2006, therefore, is allowed and the delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned. 4) Learned counsel for the appellants are heard on admission. 5) The appeltants are seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Korba (for short, the Tribunal') vide award dated 16.12.2004, passed in Ctaim Case No.8/2004. 6) As against the compensation of Rs.4,15,000/- claimed by the appetlants / claimants, unfortunate grandmother and brother of deceased child Himanshu, aged about five months by flling a claim petition under Section 166 ofthe Motor Vehicles Act, for his death inthe motor accident on 23.01.2003, the Tribunal awarded a total sumof Rs.50,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 9% per annum on the Insurer's faiture to pay the amount of comf^nsation wlthin two months of the passing of the award. t-^.s 7) Learned counsel for the appellants vehementty argued that the Tribunal has erred in awarding low compensation of Rs.50,000/- only though deceased child Himanshu would have extended great support to his grandmother in her old age. 8) The Apex Court while considering as to what would be the just and proper compensation for the death of a chlld aged about 7 years in the case of Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. V. Syed Ibrahim and others reported In 2007 (4) T.A.C. 385 (S.C.) observed in paras9& 10: "9. This Court in Lata Wadhwa while computing compensation made distinction between the deceased children falling within tHe age group of 5 to 10 years and age group of 10 to 15 years. In cases of young chlldren of tender age, in view of uncertainties about, neither their income at the time of death nor the prospects of the future increase in their income nor chances of advancement of their career are capable of proper determination on estimated basis. The reason is that at such an eariy age, the uncertainties in regard to their acaderhic pursuits, achlevements in career and thereafter advancement in life are so many that nothing can be assumed with reasonable certainty. Therefore, neither is the income of the deceased child capable of assessment on estimated basis nor is the financial loss suffered by the parents capable of mathematical computation." 1 •^, ^^^' 4 The Apex Court in the case of Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. V. Syed Ibrahim and others (supra), held that the compensation of Rs.51,500/- was just and proper compensation for the death of a child aged about seven years. 9) Now, reverting to the present case, admlttedly, deceased child Himanshu was aged about five months on the date of the accident. The compensation of Rs.50,000/- awarded by the Tribunal when examinKl in the context of the above quoted dictum of the Apex Court In the case of Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. V. Syed Ibrahim and others (supra), we are satlsfled, is just and proper compensation, and does not call for any enhancement in thls appeal. 10) The appeal filed by the appellants/claimants for enhancement of the compensation, therefore, is liable to be dismlssed and is hereby dismtssed summarily. ^t'^i^- J" Sd/- Chief Justice padma Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge 1