§UEIGHW“ $QQ§§T i3? C§€§€ATT£$C§ARH EX? BRASPUR mm$gam gawm-z‘ “ iiQRAMi HGN3§LE SRRI QASEEX? ETEUPW-‘a, CJ. gs %§QN’BL§ EMRE RANQN§AT§€ CHANER‘i‘kKgR, é. W§§s$. gamai Na. ‘?S€? m Qiwé anneaé unnm Secimn 37$ «9f Ema Mam? Vnnimag inst, ‘33£3 Present : Shri F% Kharg counsei far the appeiianis None :‘er reseene‘enie N0. 1 & 2. Snré Sudhir Agrawai; couneel far respondent N03. QRI‘yER /~_,»/i/x{2r“ eeptemeer, 2mg} i gaamwmg 1‘ Sitaram Chouhan, son of maimants Shajan Ram, aged abcuf 52 years. 2. ’ 5m. Raina Bat wife of Sitaram Chsuhaia, aged abwi 5G yeara 80m are resident of vmage Ameré, . Pagi Beygaon, RS. Sariya, Tehsi! $arangsrh; District Raigam (CG) vERSLs$ Rimx-aasiicani's Q, Gurupaf Singh Sharia; son of iate Re$p057dems Ajayab‘ 8ingh, resident of Maidhakka RGadi Raigarh, Districi Raigarh (mmattisgarh) (OWNER) 2. Vidya Sagar Das, sun of $hyam 3&3, residén’i of Thmugh Haribus: Sarangarhi Bus $iand; Raigarh, DEsfE. Raigarh (DRIVER) 3. £ The Orienta! msurance Company Umited, fhrough Lace; Off§ce, Branch Mgnager, The Oriental insurance C0. Uta, itwari Bazaar, Raigarh (0G) The fQliowing .order 0f the Court was passed by i Qairiaev Guptaa Cami“ The unfortunate parents of dSceased Nand Kishore are the appeilants before us in this appeal for enhancement of the 90mpensation awargéd by the $econci Additiona! Motor Acnident C‘lgims Tribunal, Raigarn (fear short ‘the Tnbunal') vide award demo 21 ,042004, passed in Claim Case No.62/2OQ3. 2) t As against the compensagon of Rs,12,72,000/- ciaimed by the appeuants/ maimanta unfontunate parents of deceased Nanci i Kiehore by fiiing a oiaim petition under $ection 166 of the Motor ilohioles Aoiii for héo doath in the motor aooideni on 08.96.2003; fhe Tribunai awarded compenoation of Rs.1,34,0Q0/- aiong with inieresi {o2 9% per annum fmm the dam of filing of the claim peiiiion iii? the date of aotuai payment. 3) The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidenoe led before ll. held that the claimanis; son Nand Kishore died on account of the inluries sustained by him in the motor accident on 0306.20G3; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent clrivmg of the driver of the offending vehicle Bus bearing regisiration NoQGi13-ZA 011:3; ae the above offending vehicle ans on the date of the legoident' was insured with the Oriental ineurenoe Company Limited and the insurance Company could not eeteblish any breech of the potioy conditions, the insurance Company was liable to pay oompeneetion to the oiaimante, é a Z§ 4) AS the respondents have not fiied any appeal aga$n$t the award) the above findgngs reccrdied by the Tribunai hax‘le now attained finality. ‘s The Tribunai assesSed the income of the deceased ai QM ,5Q0i- per month; and R$.18,0{}0i— per annum. By deducting 1/3” 9f Rs‘1&,000!- tewards the gersena! expensea of the dQceasad, the ciaimants’ dependency was assessed at Re’lZOt‘JGX- eer annum. By mmtipiying the annual dependency of ~ Re.?‘2,€)i301- with the muitipiier ef 1’1, the compensation wee wnrked out to Rs.1,32,0(30/-A By awarding further eum of Re.2:000f- towards funera! expensee} the Tribune? awarded a tote! sum or" Rsrti34;0001’- ae compensation to the claimants. The Tribunai further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compeneation of Rent ,34iDDOf— @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the olaim petition tili the date of actual v payment. E3) Shri F.SV Khare; learned oouneel for the appellants a euomifted that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the otaimante’ evidence about the income of the deceased; in selecting the tower muitipiier of 11; in awarding only Rs.2,i3()O/— towards funerai expenses and in not awarding any sum towarde toes of eetate; and \in awarding low compensation of Rei )34,0GO/— oniy. 7) Shri Sudhir Agrewai, learned counsel for respondent No3- The Orientai indie, insurance Company Limited, on the other i\ mremis of the deceased, me muitipiier shomd never exceed 10. Er \a ‘ hand, suppmted the award and aontended that as the daimants couid not- estabiish any income of the deceasea, the compensation of Rs.1,34,0GO/— awarded by the Tribuna! is just and pmper compensation in the facts and circumsiances of the preeent case. 8) True, the ciaimants pieaded thét their eon deceased Nandf K~ishere used to earn Re‘2,GOO/— per month, the evidence ied in that behalf was not of ciinching nature. We, therefore, do not find » anyinfirmity in‘the eeeeeement of the income of the deceased by the Tribunal at R31 ‘5001- per month and Re.18,000!— per annum on ite own. eetimete. 9) The Tribune! has been quite itbere! in dedecting only 1/3” of the income of the deceased towercts his personat expenses though the deduction in that behatf oouid have been to the extent of 50% of the ineeme of the deceased in View of the dictum of the Apex Court in the oeee of $yed Basheer Ahemed and others heretie fviehammect éemeet amt another reported in {2%9) 2 $upreme Coed Sesee 22‘3“ '10) The muitipiier of 11 eeieoted by the Tribunai aieo appears to he on the higher side considering that the ciaimants are parents of the deceased and in View oi‘ the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Magicihai Comorasfiom of Greate? eiombey V3, Layman lye! and‘enoiher, reported in (2mm) 8 $CQ-3‘31, (I; whetein it was heid that in those oaees where the oiaimants are 1 1 ) The amount of Rs 2 OOOI- awarded by the Tribunai tawards fune=ral expenses In the year 2003 rs certamly on the lower srde ~ 1 m Our opinion a sum of Rs 5 OOO/— euaht to have been awarded .by the Tribunal towards funeral expenses The claimants were urther entltted to recerve Rs 5 ODOf— towards loss of estate 2) Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, we are vf the ooinlon that further award of Rs10000/— inclusive of t n if; terest component on the enhanced amount of compensation vv‘ould make the compensation of RS1 34 000/- awarded by the ~ Tribunal as lust and proper comoensatron In the facts and a circumstances of the present case. l 1g) The appeal flted by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the comoensatron therefore Is allowed in part The claimants are awarded further sum of Rs 10 OOOI- inclusrve ,of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation in]- adoitlon to the sum of Rs.1 ,34,000f- awarded by the Tribunal. l l l e 1%) Respondent No.3 the Oriental lns‘urance Company Limited lsx Granted three months time for deposrttng the ‘totat sum of Rs 10 OQDI- before the concerning Claims Trtbunal 1 5} No order as to costs. Sdl- gaff: E