•^ HiGHCOURTOFCHHATTiSGARHATBiLASPUR Appeliants Claimants .f M.A.rONo. 545 of 2009 1. Ramchandra Regar S/o late Shri Kashiram Regar, aged about 35 years, occupation service appointed in State Bank of india. 2. Smt. Sanjnl Regar W/o Ramchandra Regar, aged about 30 years, occupatlon housewife, both are R/o C/o Shri Sajid Khan, near Shri Hanuman Temple, Kanker Road, Bhanupratappur, District Kanker (CG). Versys I.Dashrath Singh Dhruw S/o Lakhan Singh Dhruw, R/o Ganga Nagar,PS Khamtarai, District Raipur (CG). 2. M/s Manibhai Pate! & (jpmpany, !^/o near Kathoilc ChurcN, Bhanpuri, Raipur, District Raipur (CG). 3.0rientai insurance Gompany Ltd. Head Offee CB 2, First Ftoor, Madina Manjil, JaJi Road, Kachahi Chowk, Raipur, District Raipur (CG). 4. Smt. Madhumita Aaich W/o Tapan Kumar Aalch, aged about 33 years, R/o Nayapara, Bhanupratappur, Distt. Kanker (CG). MEMO OF APPEAL UNDER SECTiON 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHiCLES ACT, 1988 fSinale Bench: Hon'bSe IVIr. N.K. Aaarwai. J.) Respondents ^ Non applicants Present ; Shri S.C. Verma with Shri A.L. SingrouI,Advocates for the appellants. ' None for the respondents. ORDER (Passed on 23rd day ofApriS,2009) 1. Learned counsel for the appeliants is heard on admission. 2. The instant appea! has been fi!ed by the appeliants, seeking enhancement of the compensation pf award dated 25.09.2008, passed bythe Additional Motor Accident Ciaims Tribunai (FTC), Baiod, District Durg, in ciaim case No. 65/2007, whereby a sum of Rs. 50,000/- as total ^ ^ compensation along with Interest @ 6 percent from the date of flling of appiication i.e. 24.04.2007, has been awarded to the appellants. 3. Shri Verma submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunai for thedeath of four years old son of the appeiiants, is of iower side. He further submits that as per ilnd Scheduie of Motor Vehides Act, 1988, suitabie compensation with muitiplier ought to have been applied by the Tribunal. The same has not been done in the present case, therefore, the Tribunai has committed grave error in awarding the compensation which is very much on lower side. 4. After considering the submlssions of counsel for the appeliants and after perusal of the records and the award passed by the Tribunai, ! do not find any substance in this appeai. in case of death of four years old chiid, what amount shouid be awarded as compensation is now settled by the Supreme Court in the matter of Orientai Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Syed Sbrahim and Others.(reported jn 2007 (11)SCC-512). 5. in a motor accident claim case, as per Section 168 of the Motor Vehicies Act, 1988, what is Important is that the compensation to be awarded by the Courts/TribunaI shouid be just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstance of each case. It is neither a bounty nor charity. F.L-: Sahu cy The Tribunal has not committed any error in passlng the award.The amount, awarded by the Tribunai is just, proper and needs no interference. The appeal fiied by the appeliants for enhancement of the compensation is meritless; the same deserves to be and is accordingly dismissed summarily. Sd/- N.K. Agrawal Judge €'•