. ^ ^ c' ril^^--^-—* IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M.A. (C) No.- V^t/ ^°S> APPELLANT THE ORIENTAL 'INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., DIVISIONAL MANAGER, DIVISIONAL OFFICE MALVIYA NAGAR, DURG, TAH. & DISTRICT - DURG (C.G.) Vrs. ^-^ RESPONDENTS/CLAIMANTS:- -cf, Y ^- '^f' i^oc^' !^^ ^ ^^-^ GAUTAMCHAND JAIN S/0 BASTIMAL JAIN,AGE45YRS., -^- 2., SMT. SHARMILA JAIN W/0 ^ GAUTAMCHAND JAIN, AGE 43 YRS. --^ DILIP KUMAR JAIN S/0 GAUTAMCHAND JAIN, AGE 20 YRS. 4o GOURAW JAIN S/0 GAUTAMCHAND JAIN,AGE18YRS. >'\ ^ 5. NIKHIL JAIN S/0 GAUTAMCHAND ^ JAIN, AGE 13 YRS., MINOR THROUGH GAURDIAN FATHER GAUTAMCHAND JAIN S/0 BASTIMAL JAIN, ALL RESIDENT - PARSADA, TAH. GUNDARDEHI, DISTRICT- DURG (C.G.) RESPONDENTS/NON-APPLICANJ^ 6. ^ 7. PAWAN KUMAR SAHU S/0 JEEWAN LAL SAHU, AGE 25 YRS., RESIDENT OF BELODI, POST- GUNDARDEHI, DISTRICT - DURG (C.G.) DRIVER AND OWENR OF VEHICLE HEROHONDA CD DELUXENO.- C.G. 07 L.G. 3526 BAJAJ ALLIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. DIVISIONAL MANAGER, DIVISIONAL OFFICE PANDARI, RAIPUR, INSURER OFVEHICLE N0.- C.G 07 L.G. 0449 ^- "J ..2.. €> APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF MOTOR VEHICLE ACT 1988 APPEAL VALUED Rs. 3,19,000/- ( APPEAL BY INSURANCE) COMPENSATION CLAIMED BEFORE TRIBUNALRs. 19,00,000/- AWARDED AMOUNT BYTRIBUNAL Rs. 3,19,000/- HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR M.A.fCLNo. 1464 pf 2008 Appellant The Oriental Insurance Company Limited Versus Respondents Gautamchand Jain & others APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 DB: Hon'ble Shri I. M. Quddusi 85 Hon'ble Shri Justice N. K. Aganval, JJ Shri Sudhir Aganval, Advocate Tor the appellant. Shri Rajeev Shrivastava, Advocate for the respondents No. 1 to 5. Shri Sachin Singh Rajput, Advocate for the respondent No. 7. ORDER (Oral) ( Passed on this 8th day of November, 2010 ) Per I. M. Quddusi, J. This appeal, filed by the Insurance Company, arises from the award dated 25.7.2008, passed by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (FTC), Balod, District - Durg in Claim- Case No. 31/2007, awarding total compensation of Rs. 3,19,000/- to the claimants. The brief facts, in nutshell, are that on 19.6.2007 deceased Dharmendra Jain, along with his younger brother Gourav Jain, was going to Balod from Parsada on his motorcycle, bearing registration No. C.G. 07 L.G. 0449.Near village Nipani another motorcycle, bearing registration No. C.G. 07 L.G. 3526, which was being driven by the non-applicant No.l (driver & owner) in a rash and negligent manner, directly hit the motorcycle, being driven by the deceased. Dharmendra Jain received grievous injuries in that accident and during the course of treatment he succumbed to the injuries on 19.6.2007, itself. The offence was registered in the Police Station Balod at Crime No. 147/2007. ^- !l^.'Ji iil ^ -<< ^: . •^ '<,•.;.'•• ''•^ 6. The claimants, bemg father, mother/and fhree younger bro of the deceased had filed a claira case for award of total compensation of Rs. 19,00,000/- under various heads. < . Learned Tribunal, .haying regard to the facts sitaation and the etVidence on recQrd, assessed the monthly income of the deceased as Rs. 3000/-, thereby the yearly ihcome was assessed a8 Rs. 36,OQO/-. The Tribunal, taking intp consideration the age Qf the deceased as 24 years, applied multiplier of 13 and after deducting l/3rd of the income of the deceased, it has been held that the claimants are entitled to a compensation of Rs. 3,12,000/- towards Ipss of dependency. In addition to that Rs. 2000/- were granted towards furieral expenses and Rs. 5,000/- were granted towards lossof lolve, affection and estate. Thus, a total compensafion of Rs. 3^19,OQO/- was awarded along with 6% mferest from the date of the applicati^ has been further directed that if the amount of compensation is not paid within frwo months, it shall carry the interest at the rate of9%p.a. We have heard learned coiinsel appearing for the parties and perused the lower Court record. The challenge in this appeal is on the question of quantum. The appellant has obtained permissiQn under Section 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The age of the deceased was 24 years. He was bachelor. The claimants are the parents (father & mother), one minor brother and two brothers, by age major. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant raised an objection that the major brQthers cannot be claimants. ^ ^^ ^ M 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that the standard deduction on the personal expenses of the deceased is made l/3rd only, the same should have been 50% of the total income. The monthly income of the deceased was assessed as Rs. 3,000/- p.m. i.e. Rs. 36,000/- p.a. After making 50% of the deduction the total dependency comes to Rs. 18,000/- per annum. Considering the^age of the parents i.e. 45 and 43 years, respectively, the average age comes to 46 to 50 years and according to the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in Sarla Verma (Smt.) and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another (2009) SCC 121 the multiplier of 13 would be applicable in the present case. 9. Therefore, we assess the loss of dependency as Rs. 18,000/- per annum and applying the multiplier of 13, the compensation is assessed as Rs. 2,34,000/- ( 18,000 x 13 = 2,34,000/-). Further, the claimants are entitled to get Rs. 10,000/- for the loss of estate and Rs. 5000/- for funeral expenses. Apart from that, the parents are entitled to get Rs. 10,000/-, each, and minor brother is entitled to get Rs. 5000/- for loss of love and affection. Thus, the total under these heads comes to Rs. 40,000/. Therefore, the claimants are entitled to a total compensation of Rs. 2,74,000/~ ( Rs. 2,34,000 + 10,000 + 5,000 + 20,000 + 5000 = 2,74,000/-). 10. The Tribunal has also committed an error in awarding the penal interest. Therefore, we direct that the claimants would be entitled to get interest only at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of the application i.e. 20.7.2007. ^J 11. We modify the impugned award accordingly. Rest of the terms and conditions of the award passed by the M.A.C.T. shall remain intact. 12. In view of the foregoing, the appeal is allowed in part. The impugned award dated 25.7.2008 is modified to the above extent. No order as to costs. Sd/- [.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- N. K. Agarwal Judge Thok \