a c^ /^ IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ^T.-—oNs^nBt? M.A. (C) N0. <3C11 /2009 M8'" APPELLANTS/ 1] Lakhan Lal Soni S/o. CLAIMANTS Mahettar Soni, aged about : 52 years, 2] Rajdulari Soni W/o. Lakhan Lal Soni, aged about : 48 years, Both are R/o. Village : Padimar, Bhadrapara, Balco, District : Korba (C.G.). VERSUS ! ......."..-^p-1 ^.w-:';:.;'s..©^'^^.' »^nls'iis''""',,,^'o^f7 ,,>.I>'"" «!'4."""' RESPONDENTS 1] 2. Paramlal Sahu S/o. Sant Ram Sahu, aged about : 32 years, R/o. Bhatgaon, Bilaigarh, Raipur, District : Raipur (C.G.), fDriver of the offendina vehicle) Jain Transport Company, New Bus Stand, Baloda Bazar, Raipur, . Proprietor : Ashok Jain S/o. Indra Kumar Jain, aged about Unknown, R/o, Baloda Bazar, District Raipur (C.G.). fOwner of the offendina vehiclel 3] The New India Insurance Company, through : Branch Manager, Civil Line Baloda Bazar, District Raipur (C.G-). APPEALUNDER SECTION 173 OF MOTOR VEHICLE ACT 1988 APPEAL VALUED AT RS. IQ.OO.OOO/- AMOUNT AWARDED TOTAL RS. 1.10.000/- (Claimants) HON'BI-E SHRI.T.P.SHARMA, J.J, 2. Lakhaa Lal Soni s/o Mahettar Soni, aged about 52 yeare, {Non-claifELan.ts^ 2. Soni w/o Lakh.an Lal Soni, aged about 48 years, ioth are R/o viilage Padiiuar, Bbadrapara, Balco, District Korba(CG) Versits Param-lal Satiu s/o Saut Ram. Saliu, aged aboiit 32 years, R/o Bhatgaon, Biiaigarh, Raipur, Distn.et Raipui<CG) (Driver of ttte ofiendiiig vehicle) Jaiu Trausport Conipany, New Bus Staiid, Baloda Bazar, Raipur . Proprietor, Ashok Jam. S/o Indra Kui&ar Jain, aged about unkiiown R/o Baloda Bazar, District, Raipur(CG) (Owner of fhe offendiug vebiclej The New India Insurance Coiupany fhrougb Braach Manager, Civil Line Baloda Bazar, Distnct Raipur(CO) Shri P.K. Patel, coruisel tbr fhe appeuaiits. !<tf»; MA(C) 394/2009 The foUowiag order of the Coui-t was passed by S--t Heard on adinission. The appeUants/claimants liave ffled fiiis appeal for enliaaceinent of Gie amouut of cojmpensation awai'ded ia Claini Case No.48/2008 by the IInd Additional Motor Accident CIaims Trib-anal(FTC), Korba(CG) vide awai-d dated 27.1.2009. The claimants were the parents of the deceased-Devki Soni, aii uiinianied daugMer, aged about 21 years. Devki Soni died ni tlie aiotor accideiit, which took place on 22.5.2007. The appeUaats/claiiaaats contended tliat slie was contributiiig ia the fruit-sliop of her father Em.d fliereby, she was eai-aiag to flie exteat of Rs.2,000/- p.m. On inaking tlieu' owa caSculatioii on the said incoiae of fhe deceased, fhey claimed coinpeiisation of Rs.20,10,000/- on accoiuit of death of tlie deceased in the niotor accideitt. Though t-he appellaiits/claimcmts coiitended Oiat fhe deceased was conti-ibuthig ia fhe fi'uit-shop of her father aiid ttiereby, lier incouie woiild be treated as Rs.2500-3000/- per month, but it coiues iii fhe cross-examination ofA.W.-l - Gayani Soiii that the deceased was a regular sfaident of Class 12th. Takuig aU this in consideratioii, the Tribuaal Iield it proper to conipute the coiapensation on flie basis of notional iticome, wliicli was taken at Rs.15,000/- per aunum. Tlie Tribuiial deducted l/3rd towards the persoiial expenses of fhe deceased suid fhe dependency was assessed to Rs.10,000/- per aiiauia. The Tribunal applied a luultiplier of 13 aiid fhe coiapensatioa was worked out to Rs.1,30,000/-. Tlie Tribunal awarded a fiulher suia of Rs.30,000/- under otiier heads aiid a toted co.mpensatiou of Rs.1,60,000/- was awai'ded to the appeUants/claimaiits oa account of deafli of Uie deceased-Devki Sord. Tne Tribunal also awai-ded taterest @ 9 % p.a. froia fhe date offiluig offlie claun petition tiU its reatizatioii. Leained counsel for ttie appeUaats argues that a low iticoiae of fb.e deceased has been assessed suud a low uiultipUer has been used. We have gone tlirough the contents of the impugned award. The Tribunal has assessed th.e notional tticonie of Rs.15,000/- when th.e evidence wifh regai'd to tlie m.conie of tlie deceased was not ofcluichiiig nature. We do not fmd aiiy mfirm-ity m. sucll assessnieilt m.ade by tiie Tribunal. The Tribunal was quite liberal to deduct only l/3Id towards tlie personal expeases of the deceased, as iB.ore fban l/'3rd of the uicoiae would have been deducted because fhe deceased would have been luai'ried ia due course aiid she would have her own family aad fhus, she would have spent more on her famity niem.bers thaa her parents. So far as the laultiplier of 13 is concenied, tiie sam.e caunot be said to be ou tlie lower side, lookiag to fhe lact fhat flie claimaiits were tiie parents.' Aft.er considering fhe facts aiid ctrcunistaaces of ttie case, Vtfe do iiot find aay scope for enhaacem.ent of the aBiount of coiupensation awarded to the claimaats by fhe Clauas Tribunal. The appeal has no uieiits. The same is tiable to be aild is accorduiglv disiaissed at the laotion stage itself. Sd./- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge sunita f-t