HIGH COURT OF^CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAWI: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J, Appellanfs Claimants Respondents Misc. Appeal (0 No. 1385 of2009. 1. . Kanhai Sarkar s/o Bhagirathi Sarkar, aged about 55 years; 2. Kalyan Sarkar s/o Kanhai Sarkar, aged about 25 years; All r/o village P.V. 03, Police Station and Tahsil Pakhanjur, district Kanker C.G. VERSUS 1 Deepankar Kundu s/o C.N. Kundu, aged about 37 years, r/o Tahsil Pakhanjur, district Kanker C.G. (Ownerofvehicle) 2 The New India Insurance Company Limited, near Jhankar Talkies, Jaipur Road, Jagdalplur, district Bastar C.G. (Insurer) Memo of appeal under Section 173 of WIotor Vehicle Act Present: Shri Malay Kumar Bhaduri, counsel for the appellants. ,*•, ORDER ith (14InSeptember,2011) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. .s-'^.sKa^ ? 1 "sasss^ I '^ ^ y / v<r^ w^ .A.C.No. 1385 of 2009 Shri Malay Kumar Bhaduri, learned counsel for the appellants is heard on I.A.No.01/2009, an application for condonation ofthe delay in filing the appeal. 2) On due consideration of the submissions of learned counsel for the appellants and the grounds taken in the applicatio'n.We are satisfied that the appellants have succeeded in showing sufficient cause for the delay in filing the appeal. 3) I.A.No.01/2009, therefore, is allowed and the delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned. 4) Shri Malay Kumar Bhaduri, learned counsel for the appellants is heard on admission. 5) The unfortunate husband and major son of deceased Shobha Sarkar are the appellants before us for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhanupratappur, district Kanker (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 30.03.2009, passed in Claim Case No.35/2008. 6) As against the compensation of Rs.4,20,000/- claimed by the appellants/ claimants, unfortunate husband and major son of deceased Shobha Sarkar, by filing a claim petition under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, for her death in the mptor accident on 16.05.2006, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,62,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. "•^s,.. ['sf^"'s:y. '^^.^y M.A.C.No. 1385 of 2009 ,n fv 7) 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 Tempo Trax bearing registration No. C.G. 04/H-3093 liable to pay compensation to the claimants. 8) The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- per annum. By deducting 1/3rd of Rs.15,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.10,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.10,000/- with the multiplier of 15, the compensation was worked out to Rs.1,50,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.12,000/- under other heads, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,62,000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Shobha Sarkar in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.1,62,000/- @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 9) Shri Malay Kumar Bhaduri, learned counsel for the appellants vehemently argued that the Tribunal has erred in awarding low compensationof Rs.1,62,000/- only. 10) Deceased Shobha Sarkar was aged about 45 years on the date of the accident. The claimants are her husband Kanhai Sarkar, aged about 55 years and her major son Kalyan Sarkar, aged about 25 years. The claimants pleaded that deceased Shobha Sarkar used to earn Rs.3,000/- per month as labour. It is apparent that both the claimants must be having their own i i ?y M.A.C.NO. 1385 of 2009 Sll>3bU independent income and as such, they were not wholly dependenton the income ofthe deceased. 11) The compensation of Rs.1,62,000/- awarded by the Tribunal when examined in the context of the above mentioned broad features of the case, we are satisfied, is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case and does not call for any enhancement in this appeal. 12) As we do not find any scope for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appeal filed by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation, fails and is hereby dismissed summarily. Sd/- ChiefJiistice Sd/- Rangaath Chandrakar Judge ri