HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. HON'BLE SHRI N.K. AGARWAL, J. Appellants Claimants Misc Appeal (0 No.899 of 2008 1 lshw©rBaghel, s/o Raghuwar Baghel, aged about 45 years 2 Kishun Baghel, s/o Ishwar Baghel, aged about 17 years (died) 3 Ku Sarita Baghel, d/o Ishwar Baghel, agedabout12years 4 Ku Chandrika Baghel, d/o Ishwar Baghel, aged about 10 years (Appellant No.2 to 4 being minor on behalf of through their legal guardian father, the appeilant No.1 Ishwar Baghel) 5 Ku Kalawanti Baghel, d/o Ishwar Baghet, aged about 19 years All r/o village Amlidih, Post Office Bhithidih, Police Station - Pithora, Tehsil & District Mahasamund (CG) VERSUS Respondents Non-claimants Iqbal Shah s/o Hafiz Shah, aged about 30 years, r/o Nayapara, Ward No.04, Mahasamund, Tehsil and District Mahasamund (CG) Jitendra Kumar RAthi, S/o Hajarimal Rathi aged about 35 years, r/o Gandhi Chowk, near Jain Mandir, Mahasamund, Tehsil & District Mahasamund (CG) The Branch Manager, the Oriental Insurance Company Limited through ^;^a-fil ri%a. i ^^issig^ i ^' ^ / '% i:^^/' ^ Divisional Manager, Divisional Office, Madina Building, Jail Road, Raipur, Tehsil & District Raipur (CG) Miscellaneous appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act Present : Shri Shivendu Pandya, counsel forthe appellants. Shri Sudhir Agrawal and Shri P Dutta, counsel for respondent No.3. ORDER (26th July, 2011) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, CJ. This is claimants' appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mahasamund (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 20.03.2007, passed in Claim Case No.78/2006. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.52,00,000/- clajmed by the appellants/clajmants, unfortunate husband and children of deceased Smt Maharin Bai by filing a claim petition under Section 166of the Motor Vehicles Act for her death on 30.06.2006 on account of the injuries sustained by her in the motor accident on 25.06.2006, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.2,44,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of fjling ofthe claim petition till the date of actual payment. 3) The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held that deceased Smt Maharin Bai died on 30.06.2006 \ uo on account of the injuries sustained by her in the motor accident on 25.06.2006; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle truck bearing registration No.CG-04 ZC/2901; as the above offending vehicle truck on the date of the accident was insured with the Oriental Insurance Company Limited and4he Insurance Company could not establish any breach of the policy conditions, the Insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimants. 4) As therespondents have not filed any appeal against the award, the above findings recorded by the Tribunal have now attained finality. 5) The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.100/-perdayand Rs.3,000/-per month. Bydeducting 1/3rd of Rs.3,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.2,000/- per month and Rs.24,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.24,000/- with the multiplier of 10, the compensation was worked out to Rs.2,40,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.2,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.2,000/- for loss of consortium to the husband, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.2,44,000/-, as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Smt Maharin Bai in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.2,44,000/- @ 6% per annum from the date of the Tiling of the ctaim petition till the date of actual payment. £y^^ ^. :^,...JS^ '^^3^^ v\ 6) Shri Shjvendu Pandya, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that though the Tribunal has rightly assed the income of the deceased at Rs.100/- per day and Rs.3,000/- per month and the claimants' dependency at Rs.2,000/- per month and Rs.24,000/- per annum, the multiplier of 10 selected by the Tribunal js too low and as such, the Tribunal has erred in awarding low compensation of Rs.2,44,000/- only. 7) Shri Sudhir Agrawal and Shri P Dutta, learned counsel for respondent No.3 the Oriental Insurance Company Umited, the insurer of the offending vehicle truck on the other hand supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.2,44,000/-, awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances ofthe case. 8) On due consideration of the submissions of tearned counsel for the parties and the material available on record, we are satisfied that the Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.100/- per day and Rs.3,000/- per month. Similarly, the claimants' dependency also has been rightly assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.2,000/- per month and Rs.24,000/- per annum by deducting the usual 1/3I'd of the income of the deceased towards her personal expenses. 9) Nevertheless, the multiplier of 10 selected by the Tribunal is certainly on the lower side and requires reconsideration. 10) Deceased Smt Maharin Bai was shown to be 40 years of age jn her postmortem report. Her husband claimant No.1 Ishwar Baghel was 45 years on the date of the accident. In our opinion, \A^ multiplier of 14 would be appropriate in the present case in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt) and others Versus Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported in (2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases 121, wherein multiplier of 14 has been prescribed for the age group between 41 -45 years. 11) By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.24,000/- with the multiplier of 14, the compensation works out to Rs.3,36,000/-. The claimants are further entitled to receive Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses; Rs.5,000/- towards loss of consortium to the husband; and Rs.5,000/- for loss of estate. The claimants, thus, become entitled to receive a total sum of Rs.3,51,000/- as compensation for the death of deceased Smt Maharin Bai in the motor accident. 12) Learned counsel for the parties submitted that with a view to avoid any possible dispute between the parties 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 quantified in this appeal itself. 13) Consideringall the relevant aspects of the matter including the delay in disposal of the claim petition 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.1,07,000/- atRs.13,000/-. 14) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement ofthe compensation is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs.2,44,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is .f^,, '^ li/ ,:••; .:i,^:" ^•^•..,--^^, ^ enhanced to Rs.3,51,000/- with further quantified amount of interest of Rs.13,000/- on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.1,07,000/-. 15) Respondent No.3 the Oriental Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for deposjting the total sum of Rs.1,20,000/- (Rs.1,07.000/- towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.13,000/- towards quantified amount of jnterest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.1,07,000/-) before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 16) No order as to costs. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- N. K. Agarwal Judge padma