HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J, Misc. Appeal (C) No. 1070 of 2010 Appellants (Claimants) Respondente (Non-applicants) Vinod s/o Budharu Ram, aged about 10years. Rikki, d/o Budharu Ram, aged about 8 years. Chandrika d/o Budharu Ram, aged about 6 years. Vikash, s/o Budharu Ram, aged about 4 years. Appellant no.1 to 4 are minors, through the natural guardian Smt. Nirmala Bai, wd/o Budharu Ram Gond. Smt. Nirmala Bai, wd/o. Budharu Ram, aged about 28 years. All residents of Mahima Sagar, Nayapara Ward Dhamtari, Tahsil and distt. Dhamtari C.G. VERSUS Tej Ram Sahu, s/o Sakha Ram Sahu, aged about 41 years, r/o village Katalbod, Tahsil Kurud, distt. Durg C.G. Shri K. Vinod Kujur, s/o late Shri M. Kujur, r/o F-3, Irrigation colony, Rudri, P.S. Civil Line, Rudri, distt. DhamtarkC.G. at present resident of Saliha Para, Civil Line Kanker, distt. Kanker C.G. Divisional Manager, the Oriental Insurance Company Limited, near Adarsh Bal Mandir, Dhamtari, Tahsil and distt. Raipur C.G. f) .A.C.No. 1070 Of 2010 6 Misc. Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act. Present: Shri B.P. Singh and Shri Aman Kesharwani, counsel for the appellants. Shri P. Dutta, counsel on behalfofShri Sudhir Agrawal, counsel for respondeht No.3. ORDER •th (05I"September,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 Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dhamtari (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 09.09.2010, passed in Claim Case No.01/2010. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.14,50,000/- claimed by the appellants/ claimants, unfortunate widow and minor children of deceased Budharu Ram, by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 03.10.2009, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.2,98,624/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 3) The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held that deceased Budharu Ram died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 03.10.2009; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Santro Car bearing registration y'l .-•'""•4} M.A.C.No.1070 of 2010 No.CG-05/B-1930; as the above offending vehicle Santro Car on the date of the accident was insured with the Oriental 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 the award, the above findings recorded by the Tribunal have now attained finality. 5) The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.118/- per day and Rs.3,068/- per month assuming that the deceased was working only for 26 days in a month. By deducting 1/3 of Rs.3,068/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.2,046/- per month and Rs.24,552/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.24,552/- with the multiplier of 12, the compensation was worked out to Rs.2,94,624/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.4,000/- under other heads, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.2,98,624/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Budharu Ram in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.2,98,624/- @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri B.P. Singh and Shri Aman Kesharwani, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the claimants' evidence about the income of the li .iS MAC.No. 1070 of 2010 0-y deceased and in assessing his income at Rs.118/- per day and Rs.3,068/- per month only; in deducting 1/3 ofthe income ofthe deceased towards his personal expenses; in selecting the lower multiplier of 12; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.2,98,624/- only. 7) Shri P. Dutta, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Shri Sudhir Agrawal, learned co'unsel for respondent No.3, the Oriental Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Santro Car, on the other hand, supported the award contended that the compensation of Rs.2,98.624/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the 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. It should neither be a meager amount of compensation, nor a Bonanza. 9) Now we shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.2,98,624/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 10) True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Budharu Ram used to earn Rs.4,500/- per month by working as Munshi in a rice-mill, no cogent and reliable evidence was led before the Tribunal for establishing the income of the deceased to the extent of Rs.4,500/- per month. In this state of evidence, we do not find any infirmity in the assessment of the income of the deceased by MAC.No. 1070 of 2010 the Tribunal at Rs.118/- per day and Rs.3,068/- per month on its own estimate. 11) The claimants' dependency also has been rightly assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.24,5527- per annum by deducting the usual 1/3 of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses. 12) Nevertheless, the multiplier of 12 selected by the Tribunal is certainly on the lower side and requires reconsideration. 13) Considering that deceased Budharu Ram was shown to be 35 years of age in his postmortem report, we are of the opinion that multiplier of 15 would be appropriate in the present case. 14) By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.24,552/- with the multiplier of 15, the compensation works out to Rs.3,68,280/-. The claimants are further entitled to receive Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses; Rs.5,000/- for loss of estate; and Rs.5,000/- for loss of consori:ium to the widow. The claimants, thus, become entitled to receive a total sum of Rs.3,83,280/- as compensation for the death of deceased Budharu Ram in the motor accident. 15) Learned counsel for the parties submitted that with a view to avoid any possible dispute between the parties before the Tribunal about the period for which the claimants are entitled to receive interest on the enhanced amount of compensation, the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation may be quantified in this appeal itself. M.A.C.No. 1070 of 2010 16) Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, we quantify the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.84,656/- at Rs.8,344/-. 17) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs.2,98,624/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.3,83,280/- with further quantified amount of interest of Rs.8,344/- on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.84,656/-. 18) Respondent No.3 the Oriental Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.93,000/- (Rs.84,656/- towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.8,344/- towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.84,656/-) before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 19) No order as to costs. Sd/- ChiefJustice Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge subbu