HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BJLASPUR BENCH CORAIVI: GUPTA, CJ. SUNIL KUMAR SINHA, Appeliants Cialmants Nisc. Appeal No. 301 of 2003 1. Drupat, aged 35 years, widow of late Nandu @ Nandkumar 2. Pradeep Kumar, aged 17 years, S/o deceased Nandu @ Nandkumar 3. Kumari Pramiia, aged 15 years, D/o deceased Nandu @. Nandkumar 4. Kumari Nirmala @ Niiu, aged 12 years D/o Ngndu @. Nandkumar 5. Devendra Kumar aged 10 years S/o deceased Nandu ^ Nandkumar Appellants 2 to 5 are minor through their mother as next Friend Drupat, aged 35 years; widow of deceased Nandu @ Nandkumar 6. Phaguns Bai aged 65 years.. widow of Prit Ram and mother of Nandu Ail residents of village Hatbandh PS Magarjoad, Distt Dhamtari (CG) Respoodents 2. Versus Tiiak Ram aged 33 years, S/b Bati Ram Kashyap, resldent of village Pold, PS Rajim, Tah Gariyaband, Distt Raipur (CG) Dayaram aged 45 years, S/o Sukhram Sahu, Owner of the Tractor No. MP 23/4078 resident of Kokadi, PS & Tah Gariyaband, Distt Raipur (CG) t The New india insurance Co Ltd GE Road; Power House; Bhilai, DJstt Durg (CG) ^ ^,. Miscellaneous appeal under Section 173 ofthe IVSotor Velilcjes Act Present: Shri KR Nair, fearned counsel for the appeilants. None for respondents No. 1 & 2 though served. Shri Prashant Jayaswaf, learned Senior Advocate with Shri Ajay Mishra, learned counse! for respondent No.3. ORDER tih (27tn September, 2010) The foliowing order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. This is cSalmants' appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Additional Motor Accident Ciaims Tribunai, Dhamtari (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 06.01.2003, passed in Claim Case No. 214/2002. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.9,57,000/- claimed by the appejlants/clajmants, unfort.unate widow, minor children and mother of deceased Nandu @ Nandkumar, by filing a ctaim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act for his death in the motor accident on 29.03.2001, the Tribunai awarded a tota! sum of Rs.1,37,200/- as compensatjon aiong with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of fiiing of the claim petition tiil the date of actual payment. 3) The Tribunai on a ciose scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it hetd that deceased Nandu @ Nandkumar diedon account of the injuries sustaineci by him in the motor accident on 29.03.2001; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent drivjng of the driver of the offending vehicle Tractor bearing ^ ::^.: '.M: j^^-' ,c registration No.MP-23/4070; as the above offending vehicle Tractor on the date of the accident was insured with the New India insurance Company Limited, the Insurance Company was liabie to pay compensatjon to the cJaimants. 4) As the respondents have not filed any appeal against the award, the above findings recorded by the Tribunal have now attained fjnafity. 5) The Tribunai assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.1,560/- per month. By deducting a sum of Rs.500/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.1060/- per month and Rs.12,720/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.12,720/- wlth the multipiier of 10, the compensation was worked out to Rs.1,27,200/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.10,000/- under other heads, the Trlbunai awarded a total sum of Rs.1,37,200/- as compensation to the claJmants for the death of deceased Nandu @ Nandkumar. The Tribuna) further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.1 ,37,200/- @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition tili the date of actuai payment. 6) Shri KR Nair, learned counsel for the appellants confined his submission to the selection of lower multiplier of 10 by the Tribunal. 7) Shri Prashant Jayaswal, learned Senior Counsel with Shri Ajay Mishra, iearned counsel for respondent No.3 the New India insurance Company Limited; on the other hand, supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.1,37,200/- G awarded by the Tribunai is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 8) 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. 9) Now, we shail examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.1,37,200/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 10) On due consJderation of the evidence led by the claimants about the income of the deceased, we do not find any infirmity in the assessment of the income of the deceased by the Tribunal at Rs.1i560/- per month. SJmilarly, the Tribunal has rightly assessed the daimants' dependency at Rs.1,060/- per month and Rs. 12.720/- per annum by deducting the usua! 1/3rd of the income of the deceased towards his personai expenses. 11) The muJtipiier.Qf 10 selected by the Tribunal considering that deceased Nandu @ Nandkumar was shown to be 40 years of age in his postmortem report; is certainly on the lower side. 12) !n our considered opinion, multipSier of 15 would be appropriate in the present case in view of the recent dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt) and Others Versus Deihi Transport Corporation and another; reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121, wherein mujtlplier of 15 has been prescribed for the age group between 36-40 years. 13) By muitipiying the annuai dependency of Rs.12,720/-; with the muitipfier of 15, the compensation works out to Rs.1,90,800/-. By adding further sum of Rs.10,000/- awarded by the Tribunal under other heads, the ciaimants become entltled to receive a total sum of Rs.2,00,800/- for the death of deceased Nandu Nandkumar in the motor accicient. 14) Learned counsei for the parties submitted that vvith 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 quantjfied in this appeal jtseif, 15) Considering a!l the relevant aspects of the matter, inciuding the delay in disposal of the claim petition and the present appeal and the fact that 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.63,600/- at Rs.6,400/-. 16) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appeilants/ daima-nts for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs.1,37,200/- awarded by the Tribuna! is enhanced to Rs 2;00;800/- with further quantified amount of interest of Rs.6;400/- on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.63,600/-. .J 17) Respondent No.3 The New india Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.70,000/- (Rs.63,600/- towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.6,400/- towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.63,600/-) before the concerning Claims Tribuna!. 18) No order as to costs. Sd/- Chief Justice subou Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge