HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J Appellants Claimants Respondents Non - claimants Misc Appeal (C) No.1272 of 2009 1 Smt Son Bai Yadav, w/o late Mansharam Yadav, aged about 38 years, occupation - Housewife 2 Tejram Yadv, s/o Late Mansharam Yadav, aged about 18 years 3 Ku Heera Yadav, d/o Late Mansharam Yadav, aged about 13 years 4 Ku Khushbu Yadav, s/o Late Mansharam Yadav, aged about 10 years Appellant No.3 & 4 being minor on behalf of through their legal guardian mother appellant No.1 Smt Son Bai Yadav All Caste - Yadav & All R/o Kholipara, near Railway line, Ward No.01 Gobra- Nawapara, Rajim, District Raipur (CG) VERSUS 1 Yadram Ganjir, S/o Pyarelal Sahu, aged about 32 years, occupation - Truck Driver, R/o Dummani Colony, Gobra Nawapara, Rajim, District Raipur (CG) (Driver of vehicle truck beSring registration No.CG-04-G-4106) 2 Roshan Lai Jivnani, s/o late Sunderdas, Jivnani, aged about 45 years, occupation - registered owner of vehicle truck, r/o Sindhi Colony, Gobra Nawapara, Rajim, District Raipur (CG) (Owner of vehicle truck bearing registration No.CG-04-G-4106) —c a ••SK^gl d %. 'i.-^js 'ep*"'^,/ -..—L The New India Insurance Company Limited, through Divisional Manager, Divisional Office, Madeena Building, Kutchery Chowk, Jail Road, Raipur, District - Raipur (CG) (Insurer of vehicle truck bearing registration No.CG-04-0-4106) IVIiscellaneous Appeal under Section 173 of Motor VehiclesAct Present : Shri Dharmesh Shrivastava, counsel for the appellant. Shri Shivendu Pandya, counsel for respondent No.3. ORDER (21st July, 2011) The fotlowing order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. This is claimants' appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gariyaband, district Raipur (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 26.02.2008, passed in Claim Case No.32/2007. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.15,00,000/-, claimed by the appellants/claimants unfortunate widow and minor children of deceased Mansharam Yadav by filing a claim^petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the/motor accident on 04.08.2007, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.2,86,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. ^i,'us; ,s 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 registratlon No.CG-04 G/4106 liable to pay compensation to the claimants. 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.2,300/- per month and Rs.27,600/- per annum. By deducting 1/3 of the income of the deceased towards personal expenses, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.18,400/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.18,400/- with the multiplier of 15, the compensation was worked out to Rs.2,76,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.10,000/- under other heads, the Tribunal awarded a totat sum of Rs.2,86,000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Mansharam Yadav in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.2,86,000/- @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri Dharmesh Shrivastava, learned counset for the appellants vehemently argued that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased; in assessing his income at Rs.2,300/- per month only; in deducting 1/3 ofthe income ofthe deceased towards his personal expenses; in selecting the lower multiplier of 15; in awarding low y sum of Rs.2,000/- each towards the funeral expenses and loss of consortium to the widow; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.2,86,000/- only. 7) Shri Shivendu Pandya, learned counsel for respondent No.3, the New India Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Truck on the other hand supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.2,86,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 8) True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Mansharam Yadav used to eam Rs.200/- per day as Hamal, no cogent and reliable evidence was ted before the Tribunal to establish that the deceased was getting work as Hamal for 365 days in a year and his income to the extent of Rs.200/- per day. In this state of evidence, we do not find any infirmity in the assessment of the income of the deceased by the Tribunal at Rs.2,300/- per month and Rs.27,600/- per annum. 9) The claimants' dependency also has been rightly assessed by the Tribunal by deducting the usual 1/3 of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses. 10) The multiplier of 15 selected by the Tribunal is rather on1he higher side considering that deceased Mansharam Yadav was shown to be 43 years of age in his postmortem report and the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Sint) and others Versus Delhi Transport Corporation and another S( padma reported in (2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases 121, prescribes multiplierof14 for the age group between 41-45years. 11) Nevertheless, the Tribunal has certainly erred in not awarding any sum towards loss of estate and in awarding low sum of Rs.2,000/- towards funeral expenses and loss of consortium to the widow- 12) We, therefore, deem it proper to award Rs.10,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation under the above heads to the claimants. 13) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal, fited by the appellants/claimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The claimants are awarded further sum of Rs.10,000/- inclusive of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation in addition to the sum of Rs.2,86,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. 14) Respondent No.3 the New tndia Irisurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.10,000/- before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 15) No order as to costs. ____ _ Sd/- ChiefJdstiee Sd/- Rangnath Chandrakar Judge f-e