i^^:^*^K^ '•'^S!u'°~~*& HIGHCOURTOFCHHATTISGARHATBILASPUR^^ DIVISIONBENC;H ^. •." • CORAM: HON'BLE^HRIRAJEEVGUPTA.C.J. HON'BLE^H Bl.E^HRISUN!i.KUIV!ARSiNKA,J. Misc.ADDecriNo. 425 of 2003 •'»• • . " • • ' ADpeiSants 1 Smt B^ant Bai, W/o RamnatH Sahu, CIaimants 42years 2 Ramnath Sahu, S/o Ramu Sahu, 45 ysars • • •' : • ; ': ' 3- Ky. Amrit @ Janaki Bai, D/o Ramnath, T4yeare App. No.3 & 4 fflrough natural gjiiaKiian snd mother app no.1 Smt BagartfBai, W/o Rgmnath All ; RM Will: Bonhar^ & Distt D!tamtari(CG) ] ResDondents Non-appiicants VERSUS 1 Makhan Sahu, S/GI Shiv Prasad Sahu, 30 yrs, R/o Gats^ar, The Kurud Dhamtari (CG) Distt Jeevraktian lal, S/o late Shri Ram Chand Deyangan, Rto Vi!!Sup6ta,The Kurud/ Distt Dhamtari 3 The Qriental Insurance Co Ltd., Branch Office,Dhamtari(CG): IVJisc. ADDealsundiEi^Section 4T3 of the Mrtor Vehicles :.::'::.'.';..':f%^t.l^88':',:''-. : 1::'.';::: ':.n..: ."', '' 1 Present :ShriSantosh?Bhsirat,eounselfOi'tlTeappellants. Nonefor reSRSRdents No;1 and iZ^lieugtiseryed. Shri Rrasliant?Jayaswal,SeniorRouhsel Shri Neeraj Rradhan, (^nSetfor^res^ ^ isatoiy^^ K^. "^T^ ith (30tn August,2( The following order of the Court was passed by Raieev Qupta, C.J.. This Is claimants' appeal for enhancement of the compensatlon awarded by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dhamtari (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 02.09.2002, passed inClaimCase N6.311/2002. 2) As against the compensationof Rs.13,50,OOQ/- claimed by the appetlants/claimants, ynfortunate parents, sister and brother of deceased Homan Lal Sahu; by filing a claim petition ]under Section 166 of the Motor Vehides Act, Tbr his cteath in the motor accident on 19.03.2001, the Trlbunal awarded a total sum pf Rs.1,06,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 8.5% perannym from the date oftheflling ofthe ciaim petitiontill thedateof actual payment. 3) The Tribunal on a c)ose scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held that deceased Homan Lal Sahu died on account &f theinjuries sustained byhimintbemotpraceidentori 19.03.2001; theaccidentoceurredduetorashandnegligentdrivingofthedriver of the Qffending vehicleTractor and Trolley bearing Registration NO.MP-23-GA/6026/6027; the above mentioned Tractor and Trolleywere insured under Kisan Package Policy with the Orlentai 'v- '.'..••'.......• ' : '. '.. . ..' .' ' . '., ' ' Insurance Gompany Limited, the Insuranee Companywas liabte to pay G0mpensatjontotheclaimants. ^^:."~^,l.;! .^ 3 vs "ilBt 4) As the respondents havenot flled any appeal agalnst the award, the above findings recorded by the Trlbunal have now attained finality. 5) The Tribunaj assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.50/- per day and Rs.1,3001- per monttr assyming that the deceased was gettlng work for only 26 days In a month. By deducting Rs.500/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.800/- per month and Rs.9,60Q/-per annum. By multipiying the annuai dependency of Rs.9,600/- wlth the multiplier of 10, the compensation was worked out to Rs.96,000/-. By awardirig further sum of Rs^10,000/- under other heads, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,06,000/- as compensation to the claimantsfor the death ofdeceased Homan Lal Sahu in the motor accident. The Tribynal further directed payment of interest on the above ambunt of eompensatlon of Rs.1,06,000/- @ 8.5% per annum from the dateof the flling ofthe ctalm petitlon till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri Santosh Bharat, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the claimants' evidance about the Income of the deeeased; in asse?slnghisincomeatRs;50/-perdayandRs.1,300/-permdnth; In selecting the lower multiplier of 10: ahd In awarding low compensationofRs.1,06,000/-only. l 7) Shri Prashant Jayaswal, learned Senior Counsel with Shri •^s • : -.•• ' • ,:. 11:' ; • . : :. : ' 1 ; .•..'••.": :: '• . ' Neeraj Pradahn, leamed counsel fbrresponilent Nol3 the Orlentai ?Trt;m^^a^^^li^f^@^^RT?;RS^^'@i^!;^ :);^^^' s 4 Insurance Gompany Limited supported the award and eontended thatthe compensationof Rs.1,06,000/- awarded by the Tribunal Is just and Dropercompensation in the facts and cireumstances of the present case. 8) True,the claimants pleaded that deceased Hbman La! Sahu used to earnRs. 100-150/- per day as labour, the evidence ted in that behalf was not of cllnchihg nature. We, therefore, do not find any fault in the approach of the Tribunal in discardlng the claimants' eyidence about the Income ofthedeceased. 9) Nevertheless,the inGome of the deceased assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.1,300/- per month is certainly on the lower side and requiresreconsicleration. 10) Considering that deceased Homan Lal Sahu was aged about 22 years, hecould have easily earned Rs.60-70/- per day as an un-sklited labour in the year 2001. We, therefore, propose to re-compute the comDensation taking the Incomeofthe deceased at Rs.2,000/- per monthand Rs.24,000/- per annum. 11) Asdeceased Hornan LalSahu wasyn-married onthe date of theaccident, we deduct 50%'of Rs.24,000/-towardshispersonal expenses in view ofthe recent dictum ofthe Apex Court In the case of Sved Basheer Ahamed and others Vs IVIohammed Jameel and another reported in (2008)r 2 SupremeCourt Cases 225. Thedaimants' dependency, therefore, is asse^ed at Rs.12,000/- per.annum... -: .•'"':':'•',: : : i ^:" '.••':' 12) As the claimants are parents^ brotheriand sister of the deceased, th^appropriate myltiplierwould bd of1Q invlew ofthe '=il,.l tli!li -! ::: -;^" : '( swfmasassxpvs^:':^.-. 5 dictum oftheApexCourtlnthecase of Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay Vs Laxman lyer and another, reported in (2003) 8 SCC-731. wherein it was held that in those cases where the ciaimants are parents of the deceased, the multiplier should never exceed 10. 13) By multiplylng the annual dependency of Rs.12,000/- with th6 multlplier of 10; the compensation works out to Rs.1 ,20,000/-. The claimants are further entitled to receive Rs.5,000/- towards funerai expensesand Rs.5,000/- for loss ofestate. The claimants, thus, become entitled to receive a totat sum of Rs.1,30,000/- as compensation for the death of deceased Homan Lal Sahu in the motor accident. 14) The appellants/claimants are further awarded a sum of Rs.2,000/- towards quantifled amount of Interest on the enhanced amount of compensatlorr of Rs.24,000/-. 15) The appeal flled by the appellants/elaimants for enhancement of the compensation, therefore, is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs.1,06,000/-awarded by the Tribunal Is enhanced to Rs. 1,30,000/- with further quantified amount of interest of Rs.2,000/- on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.24,000/-. 16) Respondent No.3 the Orlental insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for deposlting the total sum of Rs.26,DOO/- (Rs.24,000/- towards enhaneed amoynt of comprinsatlon + Rs.2^00/- towards^quantifiecl amount of interest -JW.-f•••..:•>'T:?~'="?.i""lyS¥* '"'•i; on the enhanced amount pf compensation of Rs.24,000/-) before the concerning Ciaims Tribunal. 17) No order as to costs. •K- Sd/- Chief JusticeJ Sd/- SuniiKumar Sinha Judge padma