\J HIGH COURT OF CHHAT ARH AT BILA DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA C J ¥ ‘ LION’BLE SHR: SUNIL FUMAR SENHA rm Misc. Appeai No. 565 of 2003 : Appellants w 1 Sarjuram Yadav, s/o Parsadi, age Claman Sundan Bal aae 50 w/o Sanu Ram Yadav Both are R/o Vin Chirahidiha Tah Chhuikhad'an, Distt Rajnandgaon (CG) about 55 years VERSUS Mubin Momad aae 52 years S/o Mash Mohhmad R/o uoan Hagar Ramandgaon (Bus Driver) ' Non-apnlicants Kasham Bha1 @_ Klshan Bhai,‘age 5f) years, S/o Kafim Bhai, RIG Subhés ard, Donaargarh Tah Dongargarh D§étt Rajnanagaon CG) (us Owner) ( Mannuial age 3O years S/o Chadanlai Sahu, RIG V.“ Birarupu' Ka%a .ah Chhuikhadan (Jeep Driver) Amar Singh, sio Chadanial Sahu, Rio Viil Biranupur <a§a Tah Chhuikhadan (Jeep Owner) : D The New lndia Insurance Co Ltd‘., istt Rajnandgaan (Eus insurer) Nationai insurance Co Ltd., GTB Corlege behind Tarbahar Naka, Biiaspur (CG) (Jeep Insurer) Misc Anpeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehrcies ‘ Act 1938 r Present : Shri Basant K’ewart; Advocat on behalf of Shri RS ' Baghei, counsei for the appellant. TI ‘ G SPUR J hh W e s Shri Abhishek Sharma, counsel for respondents No.3 and 4. $hri Raj Awasthi, counsel for respondent No.5. Shri Dasarath Gupta, counser for respondent No.6. ORDER . 42:5” Augustgoro; . of the Court was passed by The following rder kajeev Gupta, CJ. “e This is cfaimants’ appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Additional Motor Acoldent Claims Tribunal Khalragarh Drstt Ralnandgaon (for short the Trlbunal) yide award dated 23.01 .2003, passed in Claim Case No.1 4/97. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.15,46,000/- claimed by the appellants/claimants, unfortunate parents of deceased Virendra Kumar Yadav by filing a claim petition under $ection 166 of the Motor l Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on b8.09.1996, l the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.66,5GO/- as w- V “A .g ‘pompensation along with interest @_ 9% per annu‘m from the date r l of the 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 the Claimants’ son Virendra Kumar Yadav died n account of the'injuries Sustained by him in the motor accident on 869.1996 the accident occurred due to rash and neglioent' rlVIng of the driver of the offending vehicle Bus bearing JUegistration No MOT-8812 as the offending vehicle Bus on the ate of the accrdent was Insured With the New lndra insurance a:"V OO""" “ D:u_ _7 o @\ Company Limited, the insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimants. 4) The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at t Rs.6,00D!— per annum. By deducting 1/3“ of Rs.6,900!- towards the personai‘ expenses of the deceased, the ctaimants’ dependency was assessed at Rs.4,000/— per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.4,00D/'- with the multiplier of 13, the compensation was worked out to Rs.52,000I-. By awarding further sum of Rs.14,SOD/- under other heads. the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.66,500/— as compensation to the, claimants for the death of their son Virendra Kumar Yadav in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.66,SOO/'- @ 9% per annum from the date of the filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri Basant Kewart, appearing on behalf of Shri RS Baghel, learned counsel for the appellants submits that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the olaimants’ evidence about the income of the deceased; in assessing his income at Rs.6,0GG/- per annum only; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.66,500/- only. 6) Shri Raj Awasthi, learned counsel for respondent No.5 the New lndia Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Bus on the other hand supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.66,500/— awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present Case. l ll 7) Shri Dasarath Gupta, learned counsei for respondent No.6 the National insurance Company Limited and Shri Abhishek Sharma, learned counsei for respondents No.3 and 4 also supported the award. ' 8) Deceased Virendra Kumar Yadav was aged about 23-24 years on the date of the accident. The appeilants / ciaimants are . parents of the deceased. The claimants pleaded that their son . Virendra Kumar Yedav used to earn Rs.2,SOO/— per month by V ‘working as Secretary in the Panchayat and from dairy business. As against this the Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs 6 OOOI- per annum only 9) The compensation of Rs.66,500/— awarded by the Tribunal when examined in the context of the above mentioned broad r features of the case, we are of the opinion, is certainty on the iower side and deserves to be enhanced suitabiv. 10) Considering all the reievant aspects of the matter, we are of the opinion that further award of Rs.35,000/- inciusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation wiil make the compensation of Rs.66,500/- awarded by. the Tribunal as just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 11) The appeal filed by the appeilantslclaimants for enhancement of the compensation, therefore, is allowed in part. 3The claimants are aWarded further sum of Rs.35,000/— inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation in addition to the sum of Rs 66 500i- awarded by the Tribunal J r i Sun“ Kumar Sinha 12) Respondent No5 the New India, insur c ompany I Limited is granted three months‘ time for depositing the tote] sum 6f Rs.35,000/- before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 13) No order asto costs I // #e /J‘ i Sdl— Sd/- ‘ Chief Justice : Judge