•:^^^^Vv.-^^, n.^^^^ IN THE HON'BLE HI6H COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Oivjsion Bend MISC. APPEAUC) N0. 9 5p 0^2011 APPEAL UNDER SECT[ON~"1730F THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT. 1988 APPEAL VALUED AT RS. 4.04.500/- (RUPEES FOUR LACS FOUR THOUSANt) FIVE^HUNQREb ONLY ^iAppellant Non-Applicant ^^^ '^y ^%f^ >^l'.^'f o ;^v...-^y"^ ^%"-^ '^ ^•Nationat Insurance Co. Ltd. Branch Office Jharsuguda, Distt. Jharsuguda (Orissa) through its Divisional Manager, Bilaspur Branch, Taha Complex, Vyapar-Vihar Road, Bilaspur Versus Rgspondents ^ Mansai, S/o Chungru, aged ^Applicants/Claimants ^ 50 yecirs 2^ Guni Bai, W/o Mansai, aged 40 yrs (Both Caste - Uraon R/o Village - Rajaama, Thana Bagbahar, Distt. Jashpur (C6)'^^MldkoA^L^' &harni(6ongij©(l3iamidha^DongT?i 3. S/o HarTHary^ongi', aged 26 years, R/o Badibahar, Thana Handpa, Oistt. Angul (Orissa) Driver 4. /i)J'i Vijay Laxmi Private Ltd. Chowk Brijrajnagar, Jhar-suguda (Orissa). Gandhi Distt. Owner WKT OF CHHATT'IS&ARi 8ILASPUR j? a 't.B B^ .UUUUUSA ff, f6l£ulR.SULA'IA ftINHAJUDDIJN National Ihsuronce Co. Ltd, Mi ir. W. teian, '-^^;i'lli.,,. ;iiA^j^S,^.!Jii[-SSU | dvocate for the aDosllant. :ori'e for the respondent No.l & 2. ^i rf^ H < .tft; Wl ff Irti Ftf" 11^1 rf+; i^ii'y.K.'n i ss ^vWin iis s ^^ ^Mf^^ £S^i GJ'U,^ [f ^s-m ^. 11} "tei;.nr^ ^ ^ ne aoDe 03.01.; ance LomDanv lics passed in Ciaim Co.se ident Ciaii apDeai aaainst the oward .23/07 by the iearned *nai MOT. ;hort the Claims Tribunal') part!y a!loi.vmg o,pp awardinq them compensntion and fasteninq herein. ishpur (Ct') (.Tor' Sication or 'rhe clnimanTs. iabiiitv on the ogDsiIant Brief focts o'f the case are thcrt- deceased Arnii Lakda <S Umesh Lakds was workino as Cleoner m ths dumper beanng numbe" ORj.'b-e.-^lbd owned by M/s Vijay Laxmi friva'te Limiteci. On 6,9.2008 o't' about 3.00 a.rn. the ctnver of sa'd dumoer' reversed the said dumGsr in a r'ash anci nsgligent ?nanner o.s o. result of which the scid dumDer' ran ovsr the deceased eausinq grievoLis inluries to him. He died on the way when he u'as'beinq taken to th,e hosRitcJ. The claimants. who ore oar'ents of the deceased. have fiied clnim oetition seeRina comDensction to the tune of snt R.s. 25,85.000/- on the ground t,J3at they "/ere aeper deceased, who was the sole earning member in the famiiy, and due to hi; death thev have suffered loss of income. 3 The, I" ne Lia'ms i "IDU many as T!VS issues an clairn De'm'ion ot -i'hs cl e basis of plsadings of the partjes, framed as aarina tne oai-tiss in the mal'ter ailowed rdsd a sum of Rs.4,04,300/- alona 7'*^ ^,1 ySs^ss.. 1 ?S®%j v^ i itit.sr'^^t ?CJ iiabiiityto so.tisft''the awars 'sn^in i^; the apDeliant her'ein wth th; 4.. Referrinq to the .judqrnent dated 13.10.2011 oassed by the Hon'ble iolNos.6026-6027/2007 betui'een Uiiit'ecl i4- y^ a w»s ^iiii^r In.'- Indlu Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Shila Dutta, it iias been argued by counsel for the aDOeilant that desoite reiection of.the aDDIication filed under Section 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the insurance company is not prevented to fiie an appeal chcilenging the quantum. We have hear-d iearned counsel for the partiss and perusisd the impuqried as also •ne recorci snows •18-1 , A.F the Claims that though the aDEiiicotion under Section been rejected by the Claims Tribuna! vide white passing the impugned w/ar'd the Ctaims ribunal lias not followed the principles laid down in Saria others -vs- Tra/ssaort Coeporatwn onoffier reported m 9) 6 SCC 121. and since the ultimate burden to pay compensation /. we are inclined to interfere the (juantum port ofthe impuaned award, .£ Tribunal has deceased at R ily income of the deceased os Rs.4,500/-, Thus, in aosence -e evidence committed a mistake in assessino monthiy income of the "he Claims Tribunal should have assessed the ied on --the bosis of notional prescribed in the Second Scheduie under Section 163-A of the AAotor •('•'- ;hicles Act. 1988 i.e. t2;s.36.000/- o.a. (Rs.3,000/- oer month). deducted onlv 1/3 towards her. the,'de.ceased was the bsehelor and the C'laiins t nbu iersona! iiving expenses, whereas Court in the matter of Saria ;sd, was the bachelor, 50% of the deceased is to be made. Mi '^ Mrj^'niffi F: fii^r opplied by the Claims Tribunal is not in accordance with the decision of the Hon'bie Supreme Court in Snrla Verma's case (suora) cs in Sarla a case wiiere Tiie deceased ss n bachelor.. nverage age ofthe parents ofthe dsceose'd wiit be considered tor the purpose ot iTiultiplier, Accordingly.. muitjpiier ot 14 would' be opplicable in the present case as the avero.ge age of the pnrents of the \n ths '.n view of the above, u'e assess annual income of the deceased as Rs.36,000/-. ond ofter deducting 50% from it towards personal and living sxoenses of the deceased.the loss of income wouid coine to Rs.lS.OCiO/- cmd by applying multiplier of 14 to it, the total loss of dependency would co'me to Rs.2,52,000/-(18000>d4). Besides this, since the claimants ho'<'e lost o. young boy of 20 years, they are also entitled for Rs,10,000/- eo.ch Is loss of estate and fts.5.000/- towards funeral exDenses. Thus. entitied fo" is f^l the result, )eal is nl! ex'rei •s.2.77 and the innougned 'ntg shail be entitied :t Rs.4.04,500./- as •led for Simoie Int< 6% p.a. on the owarded amount from the dote of fiiing of appiication tili actual payment is niads. Rest of the conditions imposed by the Claims !hall rernain » 11. The appeai is al'lbwed to the exfent indicated nbove. No order as Sd/- LM-Quddusi Judge Sd/- G. Minhajuddin Judge y