HIGHCOURTOFCHHATTISGARHATBILASPUR DIVISIONBENCH CORAM: HON'BLESHRIRAJEEVGUPTA,C.J.& HON'BLE SHRf G. MlNHAJUDDIN, J. \^ Appellants Claimants Respondents fc^ Misc. ADDeal (C) No. 1181 of 2008 1) Kanchan Baj, w/olateShri Bhupat Prasad, aged about 33 years, 2) Pawan Kumar, s/o late Shri Bhupat Prasad, aged about 16years, 3) RoshanKumar, s/o lateShri Bhupat Prasad, aged about 14years, 4) Devendra Kumar, s/o late Shri Bhupat Prasad, aged about 12 years, Appellant No. 2 to 4 minors guardian through mother Kanchan Bai, w/o late Bhupat Prasad. All of caste Satnami and residence of village Parsada, P.S. Maro, Tahsil Navagarh, dist. DurgC.G. VERSUS 1) Rameshwar Prasad Verma, s/o Rama @ Ramu Verma, aged about 37 years, r/0 village Bhilouni, post Maro, police Chowki Maro, tahsil Navagarh, distt. Durg C.G. (Driverof offending vehide) 2) Manharan|alVerrna, sfoJhuku Ram Verma, aged about 50 years, r/o villagier ppstSilhada, Tahsil Myngeli; distt. BilaspurC.G. (Owner of offending vehicle) 3) The New India Insurance Co. through Branch Manager;New India Insyrance Gompany Ltcl. Gtic>la Mandalam Builcling SecQrid^ floor, BusStanclBilaspyrG.G. (Insurerofoffendihgvehicle) M.A.(C) N6.1181of 2008 ^o MemoofapDeal underSection 173ofMotorVehicleAct Present: Shri Vinod Kumar Tekam, counsel for the appellants. Shri P.P. Sahu and Shri Aditya Kumar, counsel for respondentNo.1. Shri Dashrath Gupta, counsel for respondent No.3. ORDER •th (16mAugust,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, Bemetara, district Durg (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 06.02.2008, passed in Claim Case No.62/2007. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.14,50,000/- claimed by the appellants/ claimants, unfortunate widow and minor children of deceased Bhupat Prasad, by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 26.02.2007, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,74,500/- 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 Bhupat Prasad died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 26.02.2007; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver ofthe offending vehicle Tractor-Trolley M.A.(C)No. 1181 of 2008 ^ ^' •1 bearing registration Nos.C.G.-10A-7546 and C.G.-10A-7547; as the above offending vehicle Tractor-Trolley on the date of the accident was insured with the New India Insurance Company Limited and the Insurance Company could not establishany breach of the policy conditions,the InsuranceCompany was liable to pay compensationto the claimants. 4) As the respondentshavenot 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.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 1/3rdof Rs.15,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.10,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.10,000/- with the multiplier of 16, the compensation was worked out to Rs.1,60,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.14,500/- under other heads, the Tribunal awarded a total sumof Rs.1,74,500/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Bhupat Prasad in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.1,74.500/- @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri Vinod Kumar Tekam, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal haserred in notaccepting M.A.(C)No. 1181 of 2008 Q^ the claimants' evidence about the income ofthe deceased and in assessing his income at Rs.15,000/- per annum only; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.1,74,500/- only. 7) Shri Dashrath Gupta, learned counsel for respondent No.3, the New Iridia Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Tractor-Trolley, on the other hand, supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.1,74,500/- awarded by the Tribunal isjust and propercompensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 8) Shri P.P. Sahu and Shri Aditya Kumar, learned counsel for respondent No.1 Rameshwar Prasad Verma, the driverof the offending vehicle Tractor-Trolley also supported the award. 9) In a motor accident claim case, what is important is that, the compensation to beawarded by the Courts/Tribunals should be just and propercompensation in the facts and circumstances of the case. It should neither be a meager amount of compensation, nor a Bonanza. 10) Now we shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.1,74,500/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 11) True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Bhupat Prasad used to earn Rs.3,000/- per month as labour, no cogent and reliable evidence was led before the Tribunal for establishing the income of the deceased to the extent of Rs.3,000/- per month. We, therefore, do not find any fault in the approach of the % ^/> M.A.(C)No.1181of2008 Tribunal in discarding the claimants' evidence aboutthe income ofthe deceased. 12) Nevertheless, the income of the deceased assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.15,000/- per annum in the year 2007 is certainly on the lower side and requires reconsideration. 13) Considering that deceased Bhupat Prasad was aged about 35 years on the date of the accident, we are ofthe opinion that he could haveeasily earned Rs.70-75/- per day even by working as an unskilled labour in the year 2007. We, therefore, propose to re-compute the compensation taking the income of the deceased at Rs.2,000/- per month andRs.24,000/- per annum. 14) By deducting the usual 1/3rd of Rs.24,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency is assessed atRs.16,000/- perannum. 15) By multiplying the annual dependencyof Rs.16,000/- with the multiplier of 16, selected by the Tribunal, the compensation works out to Rs.2,56,000/-. 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 consortium to the widow. The claimants, thus, become entitled to receive a total sum of Rs.2,71,000/- ascompensation for the death of deceased Bhupat Prasad in the motor accident. 16) 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 enhancedamount of compensation, the ^: ^'•••'i.g.sS'i ^\ M.A.(C)No.1181 of 2008 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 ttie claim petition, and the present appeal andthe.fact that the Insurance Company alone is not to be blamed for the entire delay in the matter, we quantify the amountof interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.96,500/- at Rs. 1 0,500/-. 18) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs.1,74,500/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.2,71,000/- with further quantified amount of interest of Rs.10,500/- on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.96,500/-. 19) Respondent No.3 the New India Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.1,07,000/- (Rs.96,500/- towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.10,500/- towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.96,500/-) before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 20) No order as to costs. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- G-Minhajjudin Judge subbu p..