HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DEVISION BENcH Coram HON’BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, CJ. & HON’BLE SHR! SUNIL KUMAR SINHA, J. Misc. Aggeai No. 80 of 2006 1. Sahadat Ali, S/o. Late Sirdar Ali, CLAEMANTS agad abeut 4? years, 2. Smt. Julekha Ali, W/o. Sahadat Ali, aged about 44 years. 3. lddan All, S/o Sahadat Ali aged about 14 years. No.3 minor through its natural guardian father Sahadat All appellant No.1, All resident of Tajnagar Jhilmila, P.S. Saraipali, Distt. Mahasamund (C.G.) APPELLANTS Versus RESPONDENTS ‘l . Sukhtar Singh S/o. Sardar Sétnam Singh Aged about 32 years; R/o. Shyam Nagar, Telibandha, Street No.2, Ralpur (C.G.) 2. Keshar Singh, Sfo. Amar Singh Satnami Road Carrier Telebandha, Raipur, District Ralpur (C.G.) The New lndia Insurance Co. Ltd. Branch No.1 Second Floor Raipur, Vikas Pradhikaran Bhawan, Bairang Market, GE. Road. Raipur (C.G.) MISC. APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTDR VEHICLE ACT 1$88 M Present : Shri R. Pradhan, learned counsel forthe appellants. Shri Dashralh Gupta, learned counsel for respondent No.3. ORDER (10m July, 2009) The foilowing order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J.: This is claimants’ appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Second Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mahasamund (for short, ‘the Tribunai’) vide award dated 20.10.2005, passed in Ciaim Case No.89/2003; 2. As against the compensation of Rs.15,50,000/~ claimed by the appeiiants/ ciaimants, unfortunate parents and younger brother of deceased Sabban Ali in the motor accident on 13.02.2005, when his motorcycle was dashed by the offending vehicle Truck bearing registration No. C.G.04—G-8013, resulting: in his instantaneous death on the spot itself, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.3,62,000/— as compensation along with interest @ 6% ‘ a per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 3. lShri R. Pradhan, learned counSel for the appellants vehemently argued that the Tribunal has erred in awarding low compensation of Rs.3,62,000/— only. 4. Shri Dashrath Gupta, learned counsel for respondent No.3 > The New India Insurance Company Limited, on the other hand, contended that the Tribunal has erred in awarding excessive amount of Rs.3,62,000/— as compensation to the claimants, who are parents and brother of deceased Sabban Ali. 5. The claimants pleaded that deceased Sabban Ali used to learn Rs.500/— per day by running a hotel near bus stand at i Saraipali, but the evidence led in that behalf was not of clinching nature. The ciaimants did not produce any documentary evidence to establish the fact that deceased Sabban All was running a hotel at all. ln this state of evidence; we are of the opinion that the income of the deceased assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.4,000/'— per month is rather on the higher side. 6. The deduction of 50% of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses by the Tribunal, cannot be found fault with in View of the fact that deceased Sabban Ali on the date of the accident was unmarried and after his marriage, his contribution towards his parents would have been reduced substantially. 7. The multiplier of 15 selected by the Tribunal too is on the higher side in view of the fact that the claimants were parents and younger brother of the deceased and in View of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay Vs. Laxman ‘lyer & another, reported in (2003) 8 SCC 731, wherein it has been held that in those caseswhere the claimants are parents of the deceased, the multiplier should never exceed 1 O. ’ 8. We, therefore, do not find any scope for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 9. The appeal filed by the appellants for enhancement of the'‘ compensation, therefore, is liable to be dismissed and is hereby k. a wwW“ dismissed Sd,_ ‘ . Sd/' Sunil KumarSinha Judge ’ «x Chief Justice