;ini IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR fC.G.) ''- M./^o. ^^< /2006 APPELLANTS : GLAIMENTS RESPONDENTS: ^NON-APPLICANTS \^^ M ^i ;\.\"^ y., >"~y K> <$' ...y^S.^J •-^'' 1. 2. 1. 2. a-3. Smt. Kiran Bai Surose W/o Nago Rao Surose, Aged about 50 yrs. Anand Rao Surose, S/o Nago Rao Surose, aged about 26 yrs. All R/o H.M.T. Chowk, Handipara, Raipur P.S. Azad Chowk, Raipur(C.G.) Vs. Santosh Tiwari @ Guddu, S/o Bhagawati Prasad, R/o Meelpara, Dipara Durg. Present address Mehboob Khan S/o Arif Khan Rahemania Chowk, Raipur Mahboob Khan S/o Amin Khan, R/o Rahemania Chowk, Raipur The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. By Divisional Manager, The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Kachahari Chowk, Jail Road, Raipur, Tah & Distt. Raipur (C.G.) w^ Miscellaneous Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1994 ^ i ^ i-gf/SE-i /*"-HE?T r*.F fWI-'ATTIfi/SA! n&^sn ^•iw^?St E Mef°t ^no^s ti^^Mi ,••• 011 t S511 ><a?^ ^wS"€ Smt. Kiran Bai Surose and another f! Aij.jl&MTC u.d-'B 5a^ii¥if°^t'^S •^r Vsrsiis F^'. Sa 43'S%^^^f ^%^ Ft K^Sr"UI'iilUfcN 18 i(~A •3?^'^s^oH T"?.j'ar'3 ''.^ ^»;';^ls^'^ ^'i"^^! "ifh'.sres 'stUt.U^H I iV:/^H Uw^ ^SUUUU <sHU UlU^ESs. T^ .^£^ ion r/swmewctw Act, ISS' Present : Shrj Aditya Khare, counsei for the appellants. ShrlP. Dutta, counsei for respondent No.3. Thls Js claimants' appea! for enhancement of compensation agalnst the award dated 16-11-2005 passed in claim csse No.139/2004 by Fifth AdditiQnal Motor Accident Claims Tribuna!, Raipur (for short 'the Tribunaf'). 2. Facts briefly are as under: On 24-05-2004, one Purshottam Rao,(since deceased) aged about 22 years mst with an accident due to rash and r.eg'igent driving of driver of Mjnibus CG 04/ZA 0401 as a resuit ofwhich hedied. 3. The c'aimants, unfortunate mother and major brother o'f the deceased ciaimed Rs.5,65,000/- as compensation against the driver, owner and Insurance Company ofthe said Minibus for hls deaSh. 4. Learned Tribunal'on a close scrutiny ofthe evidenoe led, materiai placed on record and submission made by the partles, assessed the monthly income at Rs.3000/- per month i.e. Rs.36,000/- per annum; after deducting 1/3 towards personai expenses; assessed snnua! dependency at Rs.24,000/- per annum; appiied muitlplier of 17 and thus awarded Rs.4,08,000/- ^/ <v'y on the head of !oss of dependency. Learned Tribuna! £v-'3:-ded Rs.2,OOOA towards funerai expenses and thus awarded fota! sum of Rs.4,10,000/- along Vi/ith interest @ 6% per annum from the date of flling ofthe application against the respondents. 5. Leamed counsel appearing for the appeliants would submit that the sum awarded by the learned Tribunaf is shockirigi'y on iower side and deserves to be enhanced. 6. Per contra, learned counse! appearing for respondent No.3 insurance Company would submit that the amount awardec by the Tribunai' is on hsgher side inasmuch as the claimant No.1 is mother and the claimant No. 2 is major brother who was not dependent on the deceased. He would further submit that the mui'tjplier applied 17 by' the Tribuna! in the matter is also on higher side, therefore, the award passed by the Tribunal is just, reasonabie and no enhancement is required in the impugned -7 i have heard iearned counsel appearing for ths parties and perused the record and slso the impugned award. 'he Sesrned Tribunai assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.3,000/- per month and by sppi'yj.ng the multiplier of 17 awarded a sum of Rs.4,10,000/- inc.'uding funera! expenses which is certainiy on higher sice Sooking to the facts and circumstances of the case, so the amount awarded by the ieaned Tribunal csnnot be said to be on lower side. "•" " !n view of the above, in the considered oplnion of this Court, the, amount awarded by the .iearned Tribunaj is just and ofsubstance is liable to be and is 10. The appea! being de hereby djsmissed on admis Kvr SdA N.K. Agrawa! Judge 1