ei .f .^^^"f A *?' ^ n ^. -/^'y". '^sy-y ^-s^ ^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLESHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J. Misc. Appeal (C) No. 1291 of 2009 Appellants Claimants Respondents '?-.. 1. Budhnath Sai, aged about 46 years s/o Shri Gholo Sai; 2. Purushottam Sai, aaed about 21 years s/o Shri Budhnath Sai; 3. SuryakantSai, aged about 19 years, s/o Shri Budhnath Sai; 4. Ku. Vandana Sai, aged about 18 years, d/o Shri Budhnath Sai; All r/o House of Shri B.L. Sai, Chal of Shri Anil Singh Raikwar in front of Nand Nursing Home, Mission Road Korba, Police StationKorba, district Korba C.G. VERSUS 1 Khurshid Alam s/o Mohd. Ali, aged about 23 years, r/o village Kaseruva, police station Raniganj, district Pratapgarh U.P. Present address M/s Mahadev Transport Company, Station Road, Champa, Police Station Champa, district Janjgir-ChampaC.G. (Driver of vehicle C.G.-11 A 6911) 2 M/s. Mahadev Transport Company Station Road Champa (Owner of vehicleC.G.-11A6911) through Branch Manager, Rajesh Kumar Shukla s/o Shri Heeralal Shukla, Station Road Champa, Police Station Champa, district Janjgir Champa C.G. ^y .--"• J K t^ 3. Divisional Manager, the New India Insurance Company Limited, Raipur C.G., through Divisional Manager, the New India Insurance Company Limited, Divisional Office, Transport Nagar Korba C.G. Appeal under Section 173 ofthe MotorVehicle Act. Present: Shri Malay Kumar Bhaduri, counsel for the appellants. Shri Ravindra Sharma, counset for respondent No.2. Shri Pankaj Agrawal, counsel for respondent No.3. ORDER (15th July, 2011) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. The unfortunate husband and chitdren of deceased Smt. Shanti Sai are the appelfants before us in this appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Korba (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 24.06.2009, passed in Claim Case No.323/2007. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.51,24;000/- claimed by the appellants/ ctaimants, unfortunate husband and children of deceased Smt. Shanti Sai, by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for her death on account of the injuries sustained by her in the motor accident on 28.04.2007, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,50,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of fiting of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 3) The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held the New India Insurance Company Limited, the insurer ofthe offending vehicle Bus bearing registration No. C.G. 11-A/6911 liable to pay compensation to the claimants. 4) As the insurer of the offending vehicle Bus has not fited any appeal challenging the above finding recorded by the Tribunal, the same now has attained flnalitv. 5) The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- per annum on the basis of the notional income prescribed in the Second Schedule under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act. By deducting 1/3rd of Rs.15,0007- towarcts the personat expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.10,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.10,000/- with the multiplier of 13; the compensation was worked out to Rs.1,30,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.20,000/- under other heads, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,50,000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Smt. Shanti Sal in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above- amount of oompensation of Rs.1,50,000/- @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri Malay Kumar Bhaduri, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in assessing the income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- per annum only; in ^^ selecting the lower multiplier of 13; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- only. 7) Shri Pankaj Agrawal, iearned counsel for respondent No.3, the New India Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Bus, on the other hand, contended that as the claimant could not establish that the deceased had any deflnite and regular income, the compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the presentcase. 8) Shri Ravindra Sharma, learned counsel for respondent No.2 M/s. Mahadev Transport Company, the owner of the offending vehicle Bus, also supported the award. 9) In a motor accident claim case, what is important is that, the compensation to be awarded by the Courts/Tribunals should be just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the case. It should neither be a meager amount of compensation, nor a Bonanza. 10) Now we shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances ofthepresent case. 11) True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Smt. Shanti Sai used to earn Rs.8,000-10,000/- per month from knitting, stitching clothes and other activities, no cogent and reliable evidence was ted before the Tribunat for establishing the above occuF»tion of the deceased and her income to the extent of Rs.8,000-10,000/- rer month. We, therefore, do not find any fault in the approach of ^J1 the Tribunal in discarding the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased. 12) Nevertheless, the income of the deceased assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.15,000/- per annum in the year 2007 Is certainty on the lower side and requires reconsideration. 13) Considering that deceased Smt. Shanti Sai was aged about 45-46 years on the date of the accident, we are of the opinion that she could have easily earned Rs.70-75/- per day even by working as an unskilled labour in the year 2007. We, therefore, propose to re-compute the compensation taking the income of the deceased at Rs.2,000/- per month and Rs.24,000/- per annum. 14) By deducting the usual 1/3fd of Rs.24,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency jsassessed at Rs.16,000/- per annum. 15) The multiplier of 13 setected by the Tribunal considering that ctaimant No.1 BudhnathSai, husband ofthe deceased was aged about 46 years, in our opinion, is appropriate in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt) and Others Versus Delhi Transport Corpwation jand another, reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121 wherein multiplier of 13 hastfeen prescribed forthe age group bebveen 46-50 years. 16) By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.16,000/- with the multiplier of 13 the compensation works out to Rs.2,08,000/-. The claimants are further entitled to receive Rs.5,OCK)/- towards funeral expenses; Rs.5,000/- for loss of estate; and Rs.5,000/- for 1 ^ -^?"--. //^i- '^ ^.. ^' A- 'H. '^'s""^^' :'"h-,. ^' -..^y :'.^"B"^sg£?-J'" loss of consortium to the husband. The claimants, thus, become entitled to receive a total sum of Rs.2,23,000/- as compensation for the death of deceased Smt. Shanti Sai in the motor accident. 17) Learned counsel for the parties submitted that with a view to avoid any possible dispute between the parties before the Tribunal about the period for which the claimants are entitled to receive interest on the enhanced amount of compensation, the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation may be quantifled in this appeal itself. 18) Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, including the delay in dlsposal of the claim petitfon, and the present appeal and the fact that the Insurance Company alone is not to be blamed for the entire delay in the matter, we quantify the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.73,000/-at Rs.7,000/-. 19) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs.1,50,(M)0/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.2,23,000/- with further quantified amounf of interest of Rs.7,000/- on the enhanced amount of .compensation of Rs.73,000/-. * -- 20) Respondent No.3 the 'New India Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.80,000/- (Rs.73,000/- towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.7,000/- towards quantified amount of interest iit ,if:" .....^ on the enhaneed amount of compensation of Rs.73,000/-) before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 21) No order as to costs. __ Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- Rangnath Chandrakar Judge subbu