W §-§IGH COURT OF CHHATTE$G&RH AT BRASPUR DIWSIQN BENCH CORAM: ‘ HON’BLE SHR! RAJEEV GUPTA, CJ. HON‘BLE SHRH 3UN§L KUMAR $RNHA, J.. goneiianis Appimaiik V‘ Misc. Agneai No. 688 uf 2902 1. Bachhulal s/o Patiram aged 55 years. 2. Smt. Prema Bai wfo Bachhuiai aged 45 years. 3. lndal s/o Bachhulal aged 28 years All residents of Charoda near G~Cabin, Apna Jhopda Charoda .S.H.G.R.P. Tah. Patan Dist. Durg C.G. VERSUS Resnondems 1. Baiak Prasad s/o Kartik Ram Nora-applicams Satnami aged 29 years resident 0f S.H. Nandini Nagar Clo vinage — Sirsa Bhata, dist. Durg C.G. 2. Smt. Awatar Kaur w/o resident of {VHS-7‘4, Vaishah’ Nagar, Shiiai C.G. 3. The United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Branch Offrce, G.E. Road, Tara Comprex, Bhiiai C‘G. Goverdhan Agrawal' s/o late TR. Agrawal, R/o Seth Tula Ram Agrawal Complex, Link Road, Bhilai, district Durg CG. MW MS$C, APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MQTQR Present: VEHICLES ACT. 1§88 Shri Amlyakan'i Tiwari, counsel for the appellants. Shri Basant Dewangan, counsel for respondent No.2 Shri Dashraih Gupta, counsel fer respondent No.3. Nsne for ressendent N61 . Shri Vijay Deshmukh, counse! fer respondent No.4. ORBER (9w February, 2M1} The following order of the Court was passed by Rageev Gupta, CaJ. This is claimants’ appeal for enhancement of the ~compensallon awarded by the Fifth Additional Motor Accident V o Claims Tribunal, Durg (for short ‘the Tribunal’) vtde award dated 27.03.2002, passed in Claim Case Now/1998 2) As against the compensation of Rs.11,08,000i- claimed by the appeliants/ claimants, unfortunate parents and brother of deceased Brijtal, by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act! for his death in the motor accident on 19.11.1997; the Tribunal awarded a total sum of R31 i00;000/- as compensation along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of tiling of the ciaim petition till the date of actual payment. 3) The Tnbunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held that deceased Brijlai died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 19.1 1 .1997; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Truck. bearing registration N0.MAP.R.921 1; as the above offending vehicle Truck on the date of the accident was insured with the United lndia insurance Company Limited and the insurance Company could not establish any breach of the policy f‘ / ‘ \-_, conditions, the insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the ciaimants. ‘ 4) As the respondents have not filed any appeal against the award, the above findings recorded by the Tribunal have now attained finality. 5) The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.’l;5UO/- per month and Rs.18,000/- per annum. By deducting Vi 113m of Rs.18,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the oiaimants’ dependency was assessed at Rs.12,000l— per annum. By‘multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.12,000[- with the multiplier of 8, the compensation was worked out to Rs.96,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.4,00Q/« under other heads, the Tribunal awarded a totat sum of Rsi1,00,0QO/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Brijlal in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of (L ihterest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.1,00,0001— @ 9% per annum from the date of fiiing of the otaim petition till the ‘ date of aotuai payment. 6) Shri Amiyakant Tiwari, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in awarding low sum towards funeral expenses and net awarding any sum toWards loss of estate; and in awarding low compensation of Rst ,00,000!- only, 7) Shri Dashrath Gupta, teamed counsel for respondent No.3, the United lndia insurance Company Limited, on the other hand, supported the award and contended that the compensation of a t, L;_r .ae .#, Vi Rs.1,00,000/— awarded by the Tribunal is just and prope¥ campensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 8) Shri Basant Dewangan and Shri Vijay Deshmukh, learned counsel for respondents No.2 and 4, also supported the award. 9) Deceased Brijlal was aged about 20 years on the date of the accident. The claimants are his parents and brother. The unfortunate accident inlwhich deceased Brijlal lost his life took V - place in the year 1997. 10) On due consideration of the abovementioned broad features a of the case, we are satisfied that the Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the deceased and the claimants’ dependency and so also the multiplier selected is also appropriate in the case. 1‘s) Nevertheless, the Tribunal has certainly fallen into error in awarding low sum towards funeral expenses and not awarding any sum towards loss of estate. ‘ 12) Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, we are of the opinion that further award of Rs.10,000/— inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation would make the compensation of Rsf ,O0,00D/— awarded by the Tribunal as iust and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 13) The appeal hled by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation. therefore, is allowed in part. The claimants are awarded further sum of Rs.10,000/— inclusive of i / ’ _ r» ,nq interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation in addition to the sum of Rs.1 ,00,QDG!— awarded by the Tribunai. 14) Respondent No.3 the United india insurance Company Limited is granted three months’ time for depositing the further sum of Rs.iD,OOO/- before the concerning Claims Tribunal. Vita, /7. 15) No order as to costs. V/ Sdl— Sd/-, CHIEF JUSTICE Sun“ Kumar 5mg Judge