^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J. Misc. Appeal (0 No. 487 of 2008 Appellants Claimants r {- Respondents Non-claimants Satish 'Kumar Yadav, S/o Late Phiranta Yadav, aged about 11 years Smt Ramhin Bai Yadav, W/o Pulas Ram Yadav, aged about 42 years (Appellant No.1 being minor on behalf of through his legal guardian aunty appellant No.2 Smt Ramhin Bai Yadav) Both R/o Mathpurena, Raipur, Police Statioh - Tikrapara, Raipur, Tehsil & District - Raipur (CG) VERSUS Sanjay Sharma, S/o Mangi lal Sharma, aged about 40 years, R/o Village - Sikolabhata, Police Station - Mohan Nagar, Durg, Tehsil & District - Durg (CG) (Driver of vehicte Bus bearing registration No.CG-04/E-0533) Surjeet Singh, S/o Jaswinder Singh, through - Mahendra Tour and New Bus Stand, Pandri, Tehsil & District - Raipur Travels Raipur, (CG) (Owner of vehicle Bus bearing registration No.CG-04/E-0533) The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, through Divisional Manager, Divisional Office, Kutchery Chowk, Madina Manzil, Raipur, District - Raipur (CG) (Insurer of vehicle Bus bearing registration No.CG-04/E-0533) p ^ ^ Appeal under Section 173 ofthe MotorVehicle Act. 1988 Present: Shri Shivendu Pandya, counsel for the appellants. Shri Shailendra Sharma, counsel for respondent No.3. ORDER (21stJune,,2011) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. This is claimants' appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 20.12.2007, passed in Claim Case No.31/2007. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.9,50,000/- claimed by the appellants/ claimants, unfortunate younger brother and aunt of deceased Ram Manoj Yadav, by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 07.05.2007, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,75,000/- 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 Ram Manoj Yadav died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 07.05.2007; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Bus bearing registration No.C.G.-04/E-0533; as the above offending vehicle :\ ^ Bus on the date of the accident was insured with the Oriental Insurance Company Limited and the Insurance Company could not establish any breach of the policy conditions, the Insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimants. 4) 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 17, the compensation was worked out to Rs.1,70,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.5,000/- under other heads, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,75,000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Ram Manoj Yadav in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.1,75,000/- @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 5) Shri Shivendu Pandya, learned counsel for the appellants vehemently argued that the Tribunal has erred in awarding low compensation of Rs.1,75,000/- only. 6) Shri Shailendra Sharma, learned counsel for respondent No.3, the Oriental Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Bus, on the other hand, supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.1,75,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 9^ 7) In a motor accident claim case, what is important is that, the compensation to be awarded by the Courts/Tribunals should be just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the case. It should neither be a meager amount of compensation, nor a Bonanza. 8) Now we shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.1,75,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 9) Deceased Ram Manoj Yadav was aged about 25 years on the date of the accident. The claimants are his younger brother, aged about 11 years and their aunt having her own independent income and as such, not at all dependent on the deceased. As the sole claimant, dependent on the income of the deceased i.e. his younger brother Satish Kumar Yadav was aged about 11 years, his dependency on the deceased was also not for more than 10 years. Though, the claimants pleaded that deceased Ram Manoj Yadav used to earn Rs.6,000/- per month as helper in the Bus, no cogent and reliable evidence was led before the Tribunal to establish the above occupation of the deceased and his income to the extent of Rs.6,000/- per month. In fact, the driver and owner of the Bus in their written statement have categorically denied that the deceased was working as helper in the Bus. 10)^ The compensation of Rs.1,75,000/-, awarded by the Tribunal when examined in the context of the abovementioned broad features of the case, we are satisfied, is just and proper •;.:-\ ^' ^ " -. ?' ".:s.:^"^^ s t"'»>. ;•,. '<>l ^ ' ^^.%^' '^^'^•^^^•" f)T ^swwwvs^' compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case and does not call for any enhancement in this appeal. 11) As we do not find any scope for enhancement of the compensation, the appeal filed by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed. 12) No order as to costs. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge subbu