@ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH Coram : HON’BLE $HRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON’BLE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINHA, J. M.A. No. 289 OF 2005 APPELLANT Aeran Das, Aged about 35 years, ‘ Claimant ‘ S/o. La'te Masih Das, By Caste — Christen, Rlo Jyotipur, Pendra road, P.S. & Tah. Gaorella, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) ‘ Versus 1. Executive romcer, Gramind RESPONDENTS Yantriki Seva Sambhag pendra, Tah. Pendra road, Distt. Bil‘aspur (C.G.) 2. Siril Kumar Das, S/o. Janamsinh Das, Aged about 35 years, Crischen R70. Teubandha, Raipur (C.G.) At present residing at. Gurukul‘ Sehool Parisar Gaorella, P.S. Gaoreiia, Distt. Biiaspur (C.G.) ‘ State of Chhattisgarh, Through: Coliectbr Bilaspur, Distt. Biiaspur (C.G.) DRIVER MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 ‘ Present: Shri‘ Goutam Khetrapai, learned counsei for the appellant. ORDER (26* February, zoos) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. : \, xi l\ @ Shri Goutam Khetrapal, learned counsel for the appellant is heard on M.C.P, No. 361/2005, a petition for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. 2. On due consideration, we are satisfied that the appellant has succeeded in showing sufficient cause for the‘ delay in filing the appeal. 3. M.C.P. No.361 [2005, therefore, is allowed and the delay in filing the appeal is herebyoondoned. 4. Shri Goutam Khetrapal, learned counsel for the appellant is heard on admission. 5. Appellant Aeran Das is seeking enhancernent of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (F.T.C.), Pendra Road, (for short ‘the :l‘ribunal’), vide award dated 30.092004, passed in Claim case No.31f2002. 6. As against the compensation of Rs.1;5,50,0001- claimed by appellant/claimant Aeran Das by filing a claim petition under Section ‘1 66 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for the death of his minor son AmanDas, aged about six years in the motor accident on 12-06-1999, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.52,000l— as compensation along with interest @ 8% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 7. Shri Goutam‘Khetrapal, learned counsel for the appellant vehemently argued that the compensation of Rs.52,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is too low as appellant's son Aman Das would have extended support to the appellant in his old age. /i \ 8. The compensation of Rs.52,000/- awarded by the Tribunal when eXamined in the context of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Syed lbrahim and others, reported in 2007(4) TAC 385 (SC) and the fact that appellant’s son Aman Das was aged about six years ohly on the date of the accident, Vwe are satisfied, is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 9. We, therefore, do not find any scope for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. , 10. The appeal filed by the appellant/claimant for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, therefore, is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed sunlrga’ribi.“ $mmi x s l Sd/- 5d/‘ . . x ‘ Sunil Kumar Sinha Chief Justice \ Judge