f^^fW ^l INDIA f^^TWORUPJJS IN THE HIGH OF JUDICATURE OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Appellants M.A.(C.) No....^.*^l-/./200^ Smt. Ba^anta Bai W/o Bhagwani Ram Aged about 28 years 1) ^' 2) Bhagwani Ram S/o Late Jhumuk Das Aged about 32 years Both are resident of Kanti ^- Chowk, Tikrapara Raipur, Tahsil 8& District Raipur (C.G.) Versus Respondents 1) ....-;;9jr^ >-;^^;'j -"" ^y 5)^ Santram @ Salik Ram Dhruv R/o Village Rajpur, Police Station Magarlod, Tahsil Kurud, District Dhamtari (C.G.) Dhalgir Goswami S/o Shankar Goswami R/o Village Rajpur, Police Station Magarlod, Tahsil Kurud, District Dhamtari (C.G.) The Oriential Insurance Company Ltd., Madina Building Jail Road, Raipur Tahsil & District Raipur (C.G.) Arising out ofjudgment dated 29/0^/07 in claim case No. 94/07 passed by Madam Suman Ekka 10th Additional Motor Accident claim Tribunal Raipur (C.G.^ ' r--~" MEMO OF APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF MOTOR VEHICLE ACT 1988, HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MISC. APPEAL (Cl No. 440/2009 APPBLLANTS Smt Basanta Bai and others Versus RESPONDENTS Santram andothers S.B.l-Hon, Shri N.K. Agarwal,J PRESENT :- Shri S.K. Guha, Adv. for the appellant. Shri P. Datta, Adv. for the respondent No. 3. None for respondents No. 1 and 2, though seryed. ORAL ORDER (7-1-2010) Heard. 2. Appellant/ claimant is seeking enlimicement of tbe conipensation awarded by the Xth Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (FTC) Raipiir (for sliort "fhe Tribunal^ vlde award dated 29-9-2007 passed in Claim Case No. 94/2007, whereby an amouilt.ofRs. 1,62,OQO/- has been awarded by leamed Tribunal in favour of the appellant against the respondents for the death of a 7 years old child of the appeUants who are parents ofthe deceased child. | 3. Brief facts of the case are that on 12-5-2007, deeeased Khammandas aged about 7 years met wifh 0x1 accident wifh Tractor bearing registratipn No. CQ-5-B-3128 and trolley bearmg re^stration No. CG-5-B-3129 resultmg in his deatfa. The * claimants/appeUaats, the unfortimate parents of the said child claimed Rs. 5,00,000/- as compensation for fhe deafh of fheir son by filing an application iinder Section 166 of fhe Motpr Vehicles Act, 1988 (briefly, the Act^. 4. Leamed Tribunal after a close serutiny of evidence led, material place and submission made by the parties, awarded a total sum ofRs. 1,62,000/-. The Tribunal after taldng notional income of the deceased as Rs. 15,000/- per annum and after deductmg 1/3 towards personal expenses, applied multiplier of 15, A ^J assessed loss of dependency as Rs. 1,50,000/-. By fuilher awarding 12,000/- on other heads, a total siim ofRs. 1,62,000/- has been awarded to fhe claimants. 5. Shri Guha, leamed counsel for the appellant would submit that leanied Tribiinal ought to have awarded interest in terms of Section 171 of the Act from fhe date of appMcation which has not been awarded by fhe Tribunal and, therefore, fhe award passed by the Tribunal is bad to this extent 6. I have heard leamed counsel for fhe parties, perused the record as also fhe impugned award. 7. Section 171 ofthe Act reads as under:- 171. Award ofiriterest where aay claim is allowed.- Where any Claams Tribunal allows a claim for compensation made under this Act, such Tribunal may direct that in addition to the amount of compensation simple interest shall also be paid atsuch rate and from such date not earlier fhan fhe date of making the claim as it may specify in fhis behatf. 8. In tiie instant case, learned Tribunal granted two months time for payment of amount of award and in default, interest @ 6% per aanum has been awarded which in the considered opinion of fhis Court is not correct In view of Section 171 6f the Act, fhe Tribunal ought to have awarded interest upon the amount awarded as compensatlon in favour of the appellants fi-om the date of application. 9. Therefore, in the considered opinion of this Coiut, fhe award is bad to fhat extent and the appeal deserves to be allowed tn part and it is directed that the msuraiice company shall pay to tlie appeUants/claimaiits interest at fhe rate of 6% per annum on the amount of compensation from fhe date of appMcation till its payment. The insuraiice company is gr^nted 3 monfhs time to pay fhe same. 10. The appeal is partiy aUowed. Sd/- N.K.Agrawal Judge