HIGHCOURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, CJ. HON'BLE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINHA, J. Misc. ADDealNo.247 of 2005 Appellants Claimants 6. Smt. Binnu Heeradhar W/o late Arun Kumar Meeradhar, aged about 45 years. Praveen Heeradhar S/o late Arun Heeradhar aged about 23 years. Ku. Prathiba Heeradhar, d/o late Arun Heeradhar aged about 22 years. Mukesh Kumar S/o late Heeradhar aged about 20 years. Arnest Kumar s/o late Arun Heeradhar aged about 18years. Smt. Angelina Heeradhar w/o late Alianthim Heeradhar aged about 67 years. (Smt. Sanjleena Heeradhar w/o late Alianthim Heeradhar, aged about 67 years as mentioned in the impugned award) All R/o Tikrapara behind Church Dhamtari dist. Dhamtari C.G. VERSUS Respondents Non-applicants Sukhvinder Singh, s/o Guru Dev Siddu aged about 38 years, r/o Dak Bangla Ward, Dhamtari, dist. Dhamtari C.G. ^.-—Kf /y /s- y 'i-h:. »it ''as'--^' f-*sS^' 2. The National Insurance Company Ltd., Branch Office No.2, Mobin Mahal, G.E. Road, Raipur, dist. RaipurC.G. IVIisc. Appealunder Section 173 of IVIotor Vehides^Act. Present: Shri Praful Bharat and Shri Santosh Bharat, counsel for the appellants. Shri Anil Gulati, counsel on behalf of Shri Q. Aziz, counsel for respondent No.2. ORDER (30th March, 2011) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. This is claimants' appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dhamtari (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 25.11.2004, passed in Claim Case No.297/2004. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.11,25,000/- claimed by the appellants/ claimants, unfortunate widow, children and mother of deceased Arun Kumar Heeradhar, by filing a claim petitioa under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 13.05.2003, the Tribunal awarded a total sumof Rs.1,12,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum in the event of the insurer's failure to pay the amount of compensatien within 30 days ofthe passing ofthe award. 3) The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held that deceased Arun Kumar Heeradhar died on ur&\ account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 13.05.2003; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Marshall Jeep bearing registration No.C.G.05/0091; as the above offending vehicle Marshall Jeep on the date of the accident was insured with the National Insurance Company Limited and the Insurance Company could not establish any breach of the policy conditions, the Insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimants. 4) As the respondents have not filed any appeal against thfe award, the above findings recorded by the Tribunal have now attained finality. 5) The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- per annum on the basis of the notional income prescribed in the Second Schedule under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act. By deducting 1/3rd of Rs.15,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependenoy was assessed at Rs.10,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.10,000/- with the multiplierof 11, the compensation was worked out to Rs.1,10,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.2,000/- towards funeral expenses, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,12,000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Arun Kumar Heeradhar in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.1,12,000/- @ 6% per -•?,<•¥ annum in the event of the insurer's failure to pay the amount of compensation within 30 days ofthe passing ofthe award. 6) Shri Prafull Bharat and Shri Santosh Bharat, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased and in assessing his income at Rs.15,000/- per annu[n only; in selecting the lower multiplier of 11; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.1,12,000/- only. 7) Shri Anil Gulati, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Shri Q. Aziz, learned counsel for respondent No.2, the National Insurance Company Limited, on the other hand, supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.1,12,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances ofthe present case. 8) In a motor accident claim case, what is important is that, the compensation to be awarded by the Courts/Tribunals should be just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the case. Itshould neither be a meager amount of compensation, nor a Bonanza. 9) Now we shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.1,12,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances ofthe present case. 10) True, the daimants pleaded that deceased Arun Kumar Heeradhar used to earn Rs.4,500/- per month by working in a Motor Workshop, the evidence led in that behalf was not of iKidEA 1 ^-^ '"^Sy.s^S'*'' clinching nature. In fact, it was not established by any documentary evidence that AW2 Mohd. Hasib was the owner of any Motor Workshopas no license or registration for running a workshop was produced by AW2 Mohd. Hasib before the Tribunal. In this state of evidence, we do not find any fault in the approach of the Tribunal in discarding the claimants' evidence about the income ofthedeceased. 11) Nevertheless, the income of the deceased assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.15,000/- per annum in the year 2003 iscertainly on the lower side and requires reconsideration. 12) Considering that deceased Arun Kumar Heeradhar, on the date of the accident, was aged about 52 years, we are of the opinion that he could have easily earned Rs.70-75/- per day in the year 2003 even by working as an unskilled labour. We, therefore, propose to re-compute the compensation taking the income of the deceased at Rs.2,000/- per month and Rs.24,000/- per annum. 13) By deducting the usual 1/3rd of Rs.24,000/- towards th'e personal expenses of the deceased, the daimants' dependency is assessed at Rs.16,000/- per annum. 14) The multiplier of 1 1 selected by the Tribunal considering that deceased Arun Kumar Heeradhar was aged about 52 years, in our opinion, is appropriate. 15) By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.16,000/- with the multiplier of 11 the compensation works out to Rs.1,76,000/-. The claimants are further awarded Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses; Rs.5,000/- for loss of estate; and Rs.5,000/- for loss of consortium to the widow. The claimants, thus, becomeehtitled t6 receive a totalsum of Rs.1,91,000/- ascompensation forthe death of deceased Arun Kumar Heeradhar in the motor accident. 16) Learned counsel for the parties submitted that witha view to avoid any possible dispute between the parties before the Tribunal about the period for which the daimantsare entitled to receive interest on the enhanced amountof compensation, the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation may be quantified in this appeal itself. 17) Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, including the delay in disposal of the claim petition, and the present appeal and the fact that the Insurance Company alone is not to be blamed for the entire delay in the matter, we quantify the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.79,000/- at Rs.11,000/-. 18) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement ofthe compensation is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs.1,12,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.1,91,000/- with further quantified amount of interest of Rs.11,000/- on the enhanced amount of compensation of R3.79,000/-. 19) Respondent No.2 the National Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total' sum of Rs.90,000/- (Rs.79,000/- towards enhanced amount of r: ./ ^f ^3 compensation + Rs.11,000/- towards quantified amountof interest on the enhanced amount of compensation ofRs.79,000/-) before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 20) No order as to costs. f -&--__ Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge // subbu "-®.. Y'.