c ^•.F ^ IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (C.G.} M.A. FC1 N0.IS-3^ /2009 APPELLANy ^ .. ^•^'r .^x ^•^•:"7^-'^J^ 5".."-:"^"" t>' ff®' RESPONDENTS J>' Smt. Rukhmin Sahu, Wd/o. Late Punuram Sahu, R/o. Village and Post Lalbahadur Nagar, P.S. Chichola, .District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) VERSUS E. Venkatramanna, S/o. Aptasuri, aged about 38 years, R/o. Vinthala Rajmundri (Gramin), Distt. East Godawari (A.P.), (Registered owner ofvehicle NO.A.P.-5-V-7834) Policy Issuing Office (Oriental Insurance Company Limited), R.R. Complex, Powerpet Station Road, Ilru, Pin Code-534002 (Andhra Pradesh) Through: Branch Manager, The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Kamthi Line, Rajnandgaon, Distt. Rajnandgaon (C.G.) CLAIM BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL : AWARD AMOUNT : VALUATION OF THE PRESENT APPEAL: Rs.11,15,000/- Rs.01,56,500/- Rs.01,00,000/- (As the appellant is only challenging the multiplier and income assed by the Claims Tribunal) MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL U/S. 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLE ACT, 1988 -gC-22 STI^T^T 'f^F ^)^ict) ^il^a -75? ^WH^. yTfty4i^ ^^wy Sff^yr 'q^^ ^^d^) ^,. /T36J ^^^^''''''""''''''"''""^^^^^ . ^^^.^,..^.....-..........— 3ii<i^i ^wi^R S.B. Hon'bte Shri Justjc^NXAdarwal <^Hi<rt^"l 'HFT^f^ "fe^ <^^i< ^3Tf^ 371^1 IseJfortheappetJarit. ^ondonatjon ef cielay in fijlng the W-12-2009 iShri GautamKhetrapal, courl; I.A. No, Q1, appiiication for appeaVsdjsmissedasnotpressed.l jHeardpnadmJssion, feelinQ aggirieved by thie aw^rd dated 09-07-2009 passed by Additjonal Motor Accjdent Claimsl Rajnandsaon(forshort'SheTribunal instantsappeaj has been preferred fc]y the Gisiimant/appeilant seeking enhancement m the amount of ^orrtpensation awarded by the learned Tribunai. L Tribunaj, Dongargarh. District l') in Claim Case No.07/2007, the The facts brj^fly stated are asi On 08-03-2C06 one Purshotte lunder [m Sahu l.e. son of the c!aimant met with an accident wjth auto-riksh^ bearing registrattQn No. AP 5V 7834 resulting in hjs jnstantanedus di The ciajman^unfortunateimtit}- R5.11,15,0®)/-as cpmpensatioh by 166 of the IViotor Vehicles Act (forMi sath. er aged aboyt57years claimed Ifiiing appjscation ynder Section |3rt 'theAct^ against the owner- cum-driverancijnsurerofthevehlcte.l The teamedJTribunal on ap^reciatton of Ihe evidencs !ed, materiai; piaced on recosxi and; $ubtijsslons made by i the parties, assessed-.the iincome' of the deceas^ Rs.36,000/- per annum. Since mpth Trjbuna! by applying myItipEier of 8; |d af Rs.3,000/- per month i.e. ^r alone is thedependent, the |ass6ssed the dependency at ^,«.^.^^^...^::^-^.^-.^ a 'tt •^%'I ft.t ^.^^•^^ 'it [C-22 3^T1^T'^T fen?F ^HW ^I^^I -3^ •^[FIRR. "^t^^. '^(ra^ 3?^r 'q^^.t MA-'CQ' ^o,/^3.^ 'qp^ll ^H*IIW 200^ •^^f ^8. 3^RTl^<HW^f^ (by ^rf^pft^-qm^f'9 fe^'d^5R ^3rt^PT3TT^T deducting 50% ^wards persona! expenses) per srmum and; avyardecl Rs.1,44,000|f- towards foss of fncome. Th© Jearned Tribyna! furtherawarded i^.12,500/- towards other heads, thus awarded tptaj sum;ofRs.1,56l500/- as compensatjon in favour ofthectajmantandasagainstther 7;5% ^er annum fro.m the ciate 6f aj: ^spondents along with Interesf @ Ipiication ti!l its reaijzation. iLeamed counsef appeannglfbr the appeEiant wouid submit thatthe amountawarded isshocksn^lyon Sower side andcieservesto beenhancect:-"- •"• • •-,:.•" "!.'. -1. ' '^:, ;' 1 hav& heard l^aroed couns^l for the appejlant and perused theorder jmpugned. | indjspgtabiy.fthe age ofSie cl^imantwas 57 years atthe time of acddent. LooKing to the age of the claimant, tearned Tribunal has rightiy appSled the muitiplier pf ^. assessed. Since the ciaimant Js N compensation, deduction of 50% tc rightly been deducted and in view Qf^bove, the iearned Trlbunal has rightjyassessed thejcompensationanldno fauitcan be found in it. in a motor accident cjaim Ga|e, as per Section 168 of the Motor VehicEes Act, 1988,wbat js important is that the compensatjon to be awarded by tlle Courts/TribunaI should be just aridiproper compensation In tHe facts and drcumstance of each case. Jt is nelther a bounty nclrcharity. Monthiy income also properiy ^ only dependent who claJmed irds persona! expenses has g :r .?;!s. '% [^^^ -HC-22 ^n^T^r Vw^ ^nlsr 5t»*iict»«f^a ^r; J&r_ T ^oci r<<i<<i<nci ?PT. ^frOT^, fa<rtt^y +iw<(tl $h*ll<=b 3nit?r 'q^ra? ^^y^i^^M ^"—--"".".-"•••"••y^y^ 'l^^' ^n^Tl^RTT^R ^a ^- SFor the reasons mentlonec <=hlAli<rt^1rl *ii*KyiT4 fs^ <Rn<$i< "^^^^n^r herelrtabove, (do not find any scope fbr enhancement of the <|ompensation awarded by the Tribuna!. ; L |'heaPP^ ^N lbytheap|>el^^^ comRepsationis.therefpreliabtelobeandis'herebydismissed on admissjon stage. No order asfto costs. i SdA N.K. Agrawal Judge