CORAM: AnDeHant Ciaimant 3 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH HON’BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, CJ. HON’BLE $I=IRI $UNIL KUMAR SINHA, J. Misc. Ap‘peal No.969 of 2005 Dashmet Bai, widow of Late Balsay, Aged about 48 years, R/o Village Jarhi, PS Pratappur, District Surguja (CG) VERSUS 1. Asif Khan, S/o Sadruddin Khan, aged about 26 years, R/oi Jarhi, Post Office Bhatgaon, TahsiiSurajpur, District Surguja (CG) (Driver) Nayak Chandar Singh, S/o Bhagwan Singh, aged about 50 years, R/o Dakshkanya, Post Chautu Agara (UP) Through Rajesh Kumar Choube, S/o Ram Murt Choube, S/o Ram Murt Choube, R/o Viiiage & Post Bhatgaon, Manager. BBC Company, Bhatgaon, District Surguja (CG) (Owner) 3. Branch Manager, lClCl Lombard General lnsurance Company Limited, Fifth Floor, Birla Tyre — 25, Barakhamda Road, New. Delhi Pin 110001 (insurer) MISC. APPEAL UNDE SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT Present: Shri Ashok Kumar Shukia and Shri Atanu Ghosh, counsel for the appellant. None for respondents No.1 and 2 though served. Shri Raj Awasthi; counsel for respondent No.3. L// ve/n..- 7/ \ \ R ORDER (04m January, 2011) The following order of the Court wa5 passed’ by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. This is claimant’s appea! for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Third Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunai, Surajpur (for short ‘the Tribunai’) vide award dated 30.06.2005, passed in Ciaim Case No.3/2005‘ 2) As against the compensation of Rs.12,50,000/— claimed by the appeliant/ claimant, unfortunate widow of deceased Balsai‘ by tiling a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 10.10.2004, the Tribunal ‘ awarded a total sum of Rs.1 ,94,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% 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 that deceased Balsai died on account of theinjuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 10.10.2004; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle dumper bearing registration No.0R—06 E/381 4; as the above offending vehicle dumper, on the date of the accident was insured with the lClCl Lombard General insurance Company Limited and the insurance Company could not establish any breach of the policy conditions, the insurance Company vTras liable to pay compensation to the claimant. @ 4) As the respondents have not tiled any appeal against the award, the above findings recorded by the Tribunal have now attained finality. 5) The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.34,000/- per annum. By deducting 50% of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses, the claimants’ dependency was assessed at Rs.17,000/- per annum. By multiplying the ~annual dependency of Rs.17,000/- with the multiplier of 11, the compensation was worked out to Rs.1 ,87,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.2,000/— towards funeral expenses and Rs.5,000l— towards loss of consortium to the widow, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1 ,94,000/- as compensation to ‘the Claimant for the death of deceased Balsai in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.1 ,94,000/— @ 6% per annum from ' the date of tiling of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri Ashok Kumar Shukla and Shri Atanu Ghosh, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal though has rightly assessed the income of the deceased and the claimant’s dependency, has erred in selecting the lower multiplier of 11 and in s- awarding Rs.7,000/- only under other heads. 7) Shri Raj Awasthi, learnedcounsel for respondent No.3 lClCl Lombard General insurance Company Limited on the other hand supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.1,94,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of.the case. ‘ 8) On due consideration we are satisfied that the Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.34,000/— per annum and the claimant’s dependency at Rs.1 7,000/— per annum. 9) Nevertheless, the Tribunal certainly has fallen into error in selecting .the multiplier of 11 and the same requires re-consideration. 10) Considering that deceased Bals‘ai was aged about 50 years on the date of the accident and his widow Dashmat Bai was shown to be 48 years of age, we are of the opinion that multiplier of 13 would be appropriate in the present case in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt) and Others Versus Delhi Transport Corporation and another, reported in_ k (2009) 6 SCC 121 wherein multiplier of 13 was prescribed for the age group between 46-50 years. 11) By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.1 7,000l- with the multiplier of 13, the compensation works out to Rs.2,21 ,000/-. The claimant is further entitled to receive Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses; Rs.5,000/- for loss of estate; and Rs.5,000/- for loss of consortium to the widow. The claimant, thus, becomes‘entitled to > receive a total sum of Rs.2,36,000/— as compensation for the death of deceased Balsai in the motor accident. 12) Learned counsel for the parties submitted that with a view to avoid any possible dispute between the parties about the period for o a ?;#‘ which the claimant is entitled to receive interest on the enhanced amount of compensation, the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation may be quantified in this appeal itself. 13) Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, including the delay in disposal of the claim petition, and the present appeal and the fact that the insurance Company alone cannot be blamed for the entire delay in the matter, we quantify the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.42,000/- at Rs.4,000/-. 14) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellant/ claimant for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs.1,94,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.2,36,000/- with further quantified amount of interest of Rs.4,000/- on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.42,000lé. 15) Respondent No.3 the lClCl Lombard General insurance Company Limited is granted three months’ time for depositing the total sum of Rs.46,000/- (Rs.42,000/- towards enhanced amount of > compensation + Rs.4,000l- towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.42,000/-) before -the concerning Claims Tribunal. 16) No order as to costs. Sd/— t " Sunil. Kumar Stnha’ i' W t \s / I/ , Stir/- Chief Justice ‘ i ‘K K Judge m Li.,,. ,.. padma