/ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRI N.K. AGARWAL, J. Misc. Appeal (0 No. 1069 of 2008. Appellant : Durpati, widow of late Chingduram, Claimant aged about 45 years, caste Bhatra, r/o village Orna Camp Adawal, tahsil Jagdalpur, distt. Bastar (Chhattisgarh) Respondents 1 Driver (Truck No.CG-17/H- 0463) Respondent/ 2 Owner TruckNo.CG-17H- 0463) Respondent Insurer VERSUS Hamid Hussain,, aged 25 years, S/o late Mohammad Hussain, Caste Musalman, R/o Singarbhat,Kanker, Distt. Kanker (Chhattisgarh). Smt. Sumitra Maheshwari, W/o Jagdish Maheshwari, aged 35 years, Resident of Mararpara, Thana Kondagaon, District Bastar (Chhattisgarh) The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Branch Office Near Jhankar Talkies Jagdalpur, Distt. Bastar (Chhattisgarh). Memo of appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Present: Shri Sandeep Shrivastava, counsel for the appellant. Shri Deepak Gupta, counsel for respondent No.3. ORDER (20th July, 2011) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. ^.^"•^^ y-^ w\. ma». 1 It; ^t f^ '<^y^ '^-^^•^ 9 This is claimant's appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bastar, at Jagdalpur (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 01.05.2008, passed in Claim Case No. 120/2007. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.4,66,000/- claimed by the appellant/claimant, unfortunate mother ofdeceased Guddu, byfiling a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 02.03.2007, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,13,584/- as compensation along with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 3) The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held the New India Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Truck bearing registration NO.C.G.-17H- 0463 liable to pay compensation to the claimant. 4) As the insurer of the offending vehicle Truck has not filed any appeal challenging the above finding recorded by the Tribunal, the same now has attained finality. 5) The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.83/- per day and Rs.2,158/- per month assuming that the deceased was working only for 26 days in a month. By deducting 50% of Rs.2,158/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimant's dependency was assessed at Rs.1,079/- per month and Rs.12,948/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs. 12,9487- with the multiplier of 8 the compensation was worked ^,.—-..^ /'y^. A" out to Rs.1,03,584/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.10,000/- under other heads, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,13,584/- as compensation to the claimant for the death of her son in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.1,13,584/- @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri Sandeep Shrivastava, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal has erred in selecting lower multiplier of 8; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.1,13,584/- only though the appellant was wholly dependent on the income ofthe deceased. 7) Shri Deepak Gupta, learned counsel for respondent No.3, the New India Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Truck, on the other hand, contended that as the claimant could not establish any definite and regular income of the deceased, the compensation of Rs.1,13,584/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 8) Deceased Guddu was aged about 16 years on the date of the accident. The claimant is the mother of deceased Guddu. The claimant pleaded that her son was earning Rs.100/- per day and Rs.3,000/- per month as labour. The Tribunal did not believe the evidence led by the claimant about the income of the deceased and assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.83/- per day on the basis of minimum wages payable to a labour. It is not in dispute that •4-' K \.. •• .:•' t) sole claimant Durpati lost her husband much priorto the accident in which she lost her son. There is no evidence on record that the claimant had any independent income of her own. The claimant as such was wholly dependent on the income of the deceased. The multiplier of 8 selected by the Tribunal is certainly on the lower side. In view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay Vs. Laxman lyer and another, reported in (2003) 8 SCC-731, multiplier of 10 would have been more appropriate in the case. 9) The compensation of Rs. 1,13,5847- awarded by the Tribunal when examined in the context of the above mentioned broad features ofthe case, in our opinion, is certainly on the lower side and deserves to be enhanced suitably. 10) Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, we are of the opinion that further award of Rs.25,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation would make the compensation of Rs.1,13,584/- awarded by the Tribunal as just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 11) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellant/ claimant for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The claimant is awarded further sum of Rs.25,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation in addition to the sum of Rs.1,13,584/- awarded by the Tribunal. '>' 12) Respondent No.3 the New India Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.25,000/- before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 13) No order as to costs. ~ Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- N. K. Agarwal Judge subbu