C! f^i \^i l<"ai 1^1 HON'BLE Sl HON'BLE SHRI MANINDRA M. SlHRiVASTAVA, Smt. Saieda Jiya aaed about 27 years. W/Q Late S.A. Kasim Jiya 2 Ehasan Jiva a it2% 3 5.A. Kaiam aged 65 years, 5/o Late rt & ^ h't's o.rvi. MIS 4 Smt. Nazir Fatlma aaed 56 years. W/o s.A. Kalam On behalf of aDDellai .2 ( Smt. Saieda Jiya W/o Lste S.A. Jiya is the care taker Minor) Kasim All R/o Shop No. 26, Daya Nagar, Risali 'olice Station Newai, Bhilai Nagar, Tah. & Distt. Durg (C.G.) VERSUS ishwar year, ihuteshwar, Aaed about 44 S/o Khaman Singh R/o Ram ihilai Nagar, Tah. & Distt. Durg (C.G.) ( Driver of Truck No. C.G. 07 LC. imt. Charanieet Kour W./o Shri Narendra Sjrsgh R/b Sirsha aaar, Tah. Distt. road (C.G.) (Rgistered owner of Truck No. C.< 7 C. "aK!W; £-..\-».\J\J\J^j 3 The Natlonal Insurance Company Ltd. C/o Reglonai Manager Brancft - Durg Ifo Bhutani ComDlex, G.E. \ D^i T-ih 9 ri'cW n. h'ov/er Mouse, i an. & aisa. uure if n \ V^.-'-i.) (Insurance Company who insured Truck N0. C.G. 07 Z.C. 3583) r r Wotor Vehlcle Act. Present : Shri Avinash C Sahu, counsel for the aDpellants. The. foli (16th December, 2009) order of the Court was oassed bv spta, C., '!v'"f- Learned counset for the appellants is heard on IA No.1/2008, a petition for^condonation ofthe delay in flling the appeal. 2) On due consideration of the submissions of learned counsel for the aDpellant and the grounds taken in the application, we are satisfied that the appellants/claimants 'na'/e succeeded in showing sufficient cause for the delay in filing the appea!. 3) !A No.1/2008, therefore, is allowed and the delay of 8 days in fiSina the appeal is herei3v condoned. 4) Shri Avinash C Sahu, learned counsel Tor the appellants Is heard on admission. 5) The ippellants are seeking enhancement of the awarded bv the 12 AdditiQnal Motor Accident CIaims Tribunal, Dura (for short, the Tribunal) vide award dated 15.12.2006 passed in Ctaim Case No.12£ 6) As against the Gompensation of Rs.4,07,73J the appeliants / claimants, unforiiunate widov/, minor son and parents of deceased SA Kasim Jiya by Tiiing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act for his death in the motor ^ 'a^s^ g s '»~....y s ''w.~»Jr.<S^'' 3 ^ accident on 09.08.2005, the Tribunat awarded a total sum of is.9,23,847/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filina of the claim petition, til! the date of actuai payment. 7) S'nri Avinssh C Sahu, learned counsel for the apDeltants vehementlv araued that the Tribunal has erred in assessina the income of the deceased at Rs.1,00,828/- per selectina the lower multiplier of 13; and in avv'ardina compensation of Rs.9,23,847/- oniy. 8) The Tribunal on a thorough consideration of the entlre evidence led bv the claimants about the income ofthe deceased in paras 12 to 16, assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.1,00,828./- per annum. i) Considering that deceased SA Kasim Jiya was L!C agent and the element of uncertainty about the income as L1C aaent, we do not find any infirmity in the assessment of the income of the deceased by the Tribunal at Rs.1,00,828/~ per annum. 10) The claimants' dependency also has been rightly assessed by the Tribunal by deducting the usua! 1/3 of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses. 11) Consi ia tne a< of the deceased, his widow and parents, we are of the opinion that multiplier of 13 selected by the Tribunal cannot be found fauit with. 12) We, therefore, do not find any scope for enhsncement of !he compensation awsrded bv the Tribunat sither on account of the oadma assessment of the income of the deceased, or the ctaimants' dependency by the Tribunal or the muitiplier selected. 13) The appeal fiied by the appellants / claimants for enhaneement of the compensation, therefore, is iiable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed sLsmmarily. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- Manindra Mohah Shrivastava Judge .•r-a \