3'CTT "iiitiioi^, aTTi<-iii6, Ri(?ilti^< •WRTT -SW sn^i.^r Vpn'f TOiiwgfeisn^t HIOH COURT OF CHHATtTISSARH AT BILASPUR (Clainiatits) •'./.vs t^? f\f 4 ^N?pft:i ^iwif'?'fe'A Ti^^R ^TsifeTsn^i I.Giilapi Bai, widcw of JMe Asliwairi K'Lunai- Siin'avanshi, aged abrnit 27 vears. I.Sinyakant, S/o laie Asliwarii Kiunar Sin'v? 'anslTi. aged about.5 yeai's. |. Khnlliahra, S/o Lat.e Nankisrain Siuyawanshi. aged abo-at67 vears. I.Mongra Bai,D/o Kliolbahra Si.i.i-ya'Hransl-a, Aged abairt 62 years. ^ppellant. Wo.2 is niinor epresented tlirougb bis motber ^iilapi Bai (appellantNo.l) ^13 the. appellante No. 1 to 4 are iRnBanent reside.nts af Villaee Easaiita- Polic" Station' Distt: Janjgir- ChhatisRarh. 41: Vara 'arh, liaB'ina, resentiy residents ot (t.hi F.huigrajpai-a, Shyain Nagai', pi.lasp'iir, Cbhatttsgarh. —-- Bi.1 % GRPRJ — FS/246—2/2007— 50.UOO. 3=5er r^iAiioi-M, ®Tfi^!<s,fst^i'yy \ ^ NIKyll %W% sn^r TRI^ (ipfg^i: an^.qn Vt-u* ^iwafeisiAw •*W[yl^l-< iWRTf Ti fe^t ^fSR?!'? ^sffimsn^t Naresh Sui-yaiTanshi, S/o Teras Siu-vawanslii. Aeed about 37 yeare, Femiaiient address Village Rasauta. Police Station: Pamearh. Distt: Janjgir-Chainpa, Cbhatisgarh, Pi-esent address Near Jarbabhata Chciwk, BitaspiB- Chbattisgarh (Owner f)f TVS Siiziiki beaiinR rRgisti'ation /^/~1 1 1 1 /f70'~7l .^/^^- L i. 1 / f ^ f ^) The Zonal Manager, ITnited India Insiu-ance Corapaiiy Ltd. Transport Wagai. Kra-ba, Throug}i tbe Branch Manager, ITnited India Insilrance Corapaay Ltd Rajendl-a Wagar Bilaspiu- Chhattisgarh. [i'. Saujay K Agai-wal., Adwcica' dvocate for fhe appeU.aiits. one for respondent Wo, I, r, H.B, Agaiwal, Sr, AdvTicat' Svocate for respondeiit No,2, writh '. Saurabh Sharma, •nrith Miss Saiigeeta tfislira., GRPRJ — FS/246—2/2007— 50,UOO. 'Svcf ^|<)|<»>-q, 8>xfl^'!S, Rl^K-fy z^ an^r TRH; (<j<<I^<») sn^r.^f lci-fig) sOTS^RF' iiNcff 'siv6 <Rii«;i< ^?3ifeT3II^[ L JU D GM ENT fPassed on 15.6.2007 1) The clainiaiits' have pr^fi awai-d dated 24,3,3005 j> Accident Claims Tribui'1 Wo,98/2003 whereby a ^1 awarded as coDipensatior) Kum.ar Sui'vavaushi, of appellaiit Wo.2, who d^ niotorcyde beai±tig re^i belonging to respondent truck resulting ia m.staiitslr pr^fa-red thj.s appeal against the tassed by the Additional Motor j.a]., Bilaspui- in Clami. Case ^um of Rs,2,59,000.?- has been towards the death of Ashwani hiisljaiid of appeUaiit No. 1 and father ted on 18,12,2002 while drhani, redistration number CG 11-7275 i, 1, which was dashed by a m.staiitslneous death ofAshwani Kumar. 2) The appeUaiits have couipensatioii with the av4n travelluig iii the said TVB alias Baiga as a pillion inotorcycle all of a suddeiji niotorcvcle was dashed siistauied grievous injuri<t» . theinjuries, It was fi.irthe} Mason by profession and ^ wages, The motorcycle wa{ preferred the appUcation for :m.en.ts tliat Ashwani Kuaiai- was 3 Suziiki along with Gaiigacai.n ridei;, However, the hajidle of got locked as a result ofwhich with the truck, The deceased and lUtim.atelv succuinbed to averred that. the deceased was a as eai'nuig Rs, 12.5/- pa' day as s iiisured by respondent No.3 for GRPRJ — FS/246—2/2007— 50,000. 3^ST •^11<<10^-1, Wrfl'H'liS, (s|<?il'H^< ^l sn^r wv (Tpi^^a TOnwnfeisn^ ^ra5?pfta 'WR?? ^ fs^ •rfS^R ^siRnan^t Howeta; the relevant period, of offendjng triick were no ta:. the driver, owner and uiszirei- t ma.de parties, wals 3) Respondent Wo, 1 was pro< ui its reply aduiitted that however. it was subruittefl tlie valid clriving license, incident as he 1'tunself veliicle at the tune of acci where the tnick after ca^ scene of occurrence, It application was not joinder of necessarypartii|s offendiiig veliicle, though the di-iver of iinkn.own trulck [teeded ex-parte. Respondent Wo.3 Ithe vehicle was iiisured by them, that the deceased did not have |He was not the 3rd pai'ty to the rashly & negligeiitly dTpring the jdent and it is a case of llit fi. run (isin.g accident had fied froni the kvas further submitted that the mau|it.ainable 011 the groi.uid of non- •iifcs i.e, driver, owner aiid nisurer of its |the offaice was registered against 4) On the pleadings of part| the tribLinal aBowed th|< awarded a suni of Rs.E various heads with a 61)11 because of tlie accideiit ii to mechani.caJ. fajlure resit It was fiirthei- held. that sii under Section 163 oftliel coutributorv negUgence )i dealt. F'urflier holding tlli ies. issues have been framed a.nd appUcation of claijnan.ts and p,59,000/- as compensation on u|idtng that the accident occurred tfmotor cycle No.CG 11-7275 due iitltiug in death ofAshwani Kumar, sjiice the application ta.as been fi1.ed IMotor Vehicles Act, the factum of |s miniateiial aiid has not been l.e "ivages of deceased at 'Rs.lOOJ GRPRJ — FS/246—2/2007 — 50.000. ~3:5Sf "qiillo-i-i), ®Tfly'l<S,is|0iy^< ^ WVtvil Wtfl^ an^?r tH% (ijt<I^«i<;g' CT.^T wnwotor aii^i tfti^s?i*TiTf '^P^ff ^' 'fsT^ '^s^p ^siRnsn^r 6) diA. per day aiid taking 210 dj arm.ual uicome of the dt Rs.21,000,/- and accordi^ i/' 3rd aad applying coinpensation has been as| 5) Learned coiinsel for the -s^ even after holdiag that th^ per day as wages has einployed for a period of Placitig reliaiice on. tl.ie illt ttds Higti Court iti the Vs. Maleshram and othet it is submitted that the trfl coBipensation by takini Rs.3,000/-. On the other haiid, lear) No.2 subiuitted th.at dec<t inason atid the tribunal li in which deceasecl wasl available tliroughcrut the tribunal that tlie deceaslf period of 2 10 days caiino^ aiid proper, tiys as anii'ua!. ivorkiiig days, the ;ceased has been assessed at dv after uia.kuig deduction of ifiultipUer of 18 ais.ount of asbessed, jpeUaiit subm.its that tlie tritounal appeUan.t was earning Rs, 100/ - lerroneouslv held that he was tlli.v 210 davs i.n the whole year, |[lgnient of the Division Bench of infetter of Shiv Kumar and others ^s reported m 2006 I..T. jC&j 96 i|lnil-ial ouglit to have assessed the nlonthlv wages of deceased at. bed 8r. Coiinsel for respondeiit dec<ta-sed was engaged in the job of |as rightly held that natiire ofjoli engaged is seasonal and not fear, Th&refore, the fitidin.g ofthe ;d was engaged gain.fi.iUy for a be faiilted and the award is iust GKPRJ — FS/246—2/2007 — 50,UOO. 3:rc!' "Ml<||</><|, 8iTfl<H']<o, R|<?i!y^< ^ 3K^?r IR% (ipfgg^g' ^RiIW ^lft^ 311^1 <^i^4iTi 'qTq^ff "^ fecet ^fs^TF ^; aifim 3iii?i 7) I have heard leariied coi 81 9) the evidence available 011 |nsel for the parties aiid perased [•ecord, -Afctll Gulapi Bai (AW-1), widow) husband was ean'ung Rsj all the 30 davs iu. a rao^ tha.t he had worked witli as a m.ason, he worked wfit date of Ms exaniination b| when he was workuig vri1 per day as wages. He counsel for respondent holiday, However, he hj exam.ination that searclitn. reqiiu'ed, of deceased, has stated that her 125/- per day and he worked for i|ith, ClAatelal (AW-2) has stated Ashwani Kum.ar for 10-1.2, veai's liim. before 4-5 years froni the ibfore the tribiinal aa.d at that tiine jh liiin, he was recewuig Rs.WOj- ^.dm.itted the siiggestioa given by No,2, that Sunday used to be ib.s further stated in the cross- Ii)-g for work ui the -vi.Ua.ge is not Thus, from the un-rebii1 coniputation of aiuiual assuniption that deceas^d days in a yeai' can^ cu'CLirustances relying u^ Slih/iaiBiar (siipra) it ^ com.peiisation payable t|o taki.iig montl-ily iacome ^ ftus Rs.3,000/-, l/3rd expenses of deceased. T^ Ited evidence avajlable on record, uiconie of the deceased on the could not work more thaii 210 aot be iiistified. bi aforesaid icn the jiidgment in the niatter of •onld be just a-nd proper if the the appeUants is assessed by >f deceased at Rs.3,000/-, Out of be deducted towai'ds personsl lus, actual loss of dqiendency per GRPRJ — FS/246—2/2007 — 50.UOO. 3:5ET ^fPTT^T, QTfl^'Ka, (s|<r>!.yy ^ Wl. 200 ?®iiwgfwsnt^i VS^PS" iWRff •ff fS^St ih^ •^ 3ifOT 311^1 month woiild be Rs.2,00p./ the deceased has been a| the date of accident, therf appUed for assessing los^ total loss of depen.dency ^T' x 12 x 18), M that. vieiv| payable to the claiiuants 1f toss of dependeiicy Loss of consorthim. to widi Fiiiiei'al Exiienses Total compensadon 10) ]n. tlie result, for the f| aJlowed aiid in substitut] compensation ofRs,4,39,( date of award till paym.en1 11) Out ofRs,4,39,000./-,ap] for Rs,75,000;- each aiid| Ho,l & 2 i.e, -mdow &,\ eiltitled to 50% of fem.£| interest, The lasurance aniount of coHipensatio| period of one nionth fro made, t}ie M.A.C.T. shii froin -. ConsiderinR that the age of ssessed beta'een 27-38 vears on ifore, appropriate itiulti.plier to be of dependency is 18, Thus, the ?ould be Rs.4,32,000/- (Rs.2,000 of the iB.atter, the compensation Fould be as under;- R.s.4,32,000./- Rs,5,000/- Rs, 2,000./- aw •t<? I/- aregoiiig reasoiis, the appeal is .ori of the mipugi.ied awai'd, total )00/- with mtei-est @ 9%from the is awarded, ihdlant No.3 & 4 shaJl be mtitled Iproportionate interest, AppeUaiits son of deceased each sha-U be linitig aniount and proportionate C|onipaziy shall deposit the balance fi before the MA.C.T, witlmi a today. On such dqiosit beiiig jiU deposit the tot.al anioiint of GRPRJ — FS/246—2/2007— 50.UOO. 3FEET ^(•tW-cf, ^•<SiW , &rtW3< WT sa^i Wite' ./- !<^ Roshan/- WMrtt 'sR^fe ao^?r TH^ (• compensation payable to nationalized baak for a interest accnied thereoni Sunilat-ly, 80% of fhe appellants No, 1, 3 & 4 sh^ tiank hi a fixed deposit s<j However, the uiterfest accrl to the appeUaiits. 'thl^<rt4i~t-i 'HRcff '^ ^&^ <^i^Pt ^.siBrost^t appeUaiit Wo.2-Suiyakant iu a ^eriod of five years along with in a fixed deposit scheme. •(|otal conipeiisation payable to pl be deposited iu a nationalized pieme for a period of five years. tiing thereon shall be disbtursed