1 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR EWHSQN BENCH HGN‘ELE-$HRI RAJEEV GUI"TA. CJ. HON’BLE SHR! RAN$NATH SHANDRAKAR, J C(TRAM: MA. N0. 463 of 2993 Anpeilanis 1. Smt Daruna Devi Sahu, wife of Shri Dharampa: Sahu; aged abcut 22 years ’2. Durges Sahu son of Shri Dharamnai Sahu, aged about 2 years (Minar) through mother : Appeiiant No. 1 $mt Daruna Devi 3. Ku Dipika, D/o Shri Dharamoai Sahu aged about 3 months (Minot) througt; mother : AppeHant No. 1 Sm: Daruna Devi AH residents of viilage — Bakaruma‘ Tah Dharamjaigarh, Distt Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) Versus Respondents ‘i. Kailashchandra Joshi’; son of Tularam Joshi, Bus owner, resident of Kapu, Tah .D'haramjaigarh, Distt Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) (Owner) 2 Naiharsai. son of Shri KisUnram Sarthi. occupation rive'r, resident of Patarapara, Dharamjaigarh, Tah Dharamjaigarh Distt Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) (Driver) 3 Manager, The New indie Insurance Company Limited, Branch Offtoe f Raigarh (insurer) l Misceiianeous Aggeai undTer Section 173 of the Hiotor vehicles Act §resent Shri DR Sharma, Senior Advocate with Smt Swati Shukia, oounsei for the appetiante. None for respondents No.1 & 2. Shri Prashant-Jayaswai, Senior Advocate with 8m Ajay MEshra, camse: far resmmdem Na 3 ORDER (zs‘h‘Egsril, 2919) The foliowing order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. This is claimants’ appeal for enhancement of the §qmpensation awardeéi by the Third Additional Motor Accident Ciaims Tribunal: Raigarh (for short ‘the Tribunal’) vide award dated 09512.2()(32, passed in Ciaim Case No.1 1/2002. 2) As against the compensation of 12,68,0t30f- ciaimed by the appellants/claimants, unfortunate widow and minor children of deceased Dharampai Sahu by fiiing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 19.09.97; the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rsi 50,856l- as compensation aiong with interest @ 9% per annum from the dat'e of the fiiing of the ciaim petition tlii the date of actual payment. 3) The Tribunai on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held that deceased Dhrampal $ahu died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 10.D9.Q7; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Bus bearing registration . NolVlP 26/C-5348; as the offending vehlcie Bus on the date of the accident was insured ‘with the New lndia insurance Company Limited, the insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimants. @ 4') As the respondents have not filed any appeai against the award, the above findings recorded by the Tribunal have now attained finaiity. i 5) The Tribunai assessed the income of the deceased at j Rs.1,000./- per month. By dedueting 1i3r° of Rs.1,0091— towards personal expenses of the deceased, the ciaimants’ dependency 'was assessed at Rs§65l~ per month and Rs.7,992/— per annum. :‘Bgr muitipiying the annuai dependency of Rs.7,992/— with the multiplier of 18, the compensation was worked out to Rs.1 ,43,856/«. By awarding.further sum of Rs.‘7,00t‘y- under other heads, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.’l ,50,856/— as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Dharampal Sahu- in the motor accident. “The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rat ,50,8’56/- @ 9% per annum' from the date of the filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri DR Sharma, learned Senior counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the claimants‘ evidence about the income of the deceased and ln assessing his income at Rs.1,000l— per month only; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.2,96,0GG/— only. 7) Shri Prashant Jayaswal, learned Senior counsel and Shri Aiay Mishra, ieai'ned counsel for respondent No.3 the New lndia insurance Company Limited, on the other hand supported the award and contended that, as the claimants could not establish the income of the deceased as pleaded by them. The compensation of Rs.1 ,5D,856/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present ‘ Case. 8) n a motor accident claim case what is important is that the I compensation to be awarded by the Courts / Trihunais shouid 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.1,50,856/— awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 10) True, the claimants pieaded that deceased Dharampal Sahu used to earn Rs.3,0DGI— per month as Bus Conductor, the evidence led in that behalf was not of ct'rnching nature. We, therefore, do not find any fault in the approach of the Tribunal in discarding the claimants’ evidence about the income of the deceased. ’H) Nevertheless, the income of the deceased assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.1 ,OOO/- per month in the year 1-997 is certainly on the lower side and requires reconsideration. 12) Deceased Dharampal Sahu was aged about 25 years on the date of the accident. in the year 1997, the deceased could have easily earned Rs.50/- per day even by working as an unskilied labour. We, therefore, propose to recompute the compensation taking the income of the deceased at Rs.5G/— per day, Rs.1,500!- per month and Rs.18,000/- per annum. 1.3) By deducting the usua! 1.13“ of Rs.18,990/~ towards the personai expenses of the deceased, the claimants’ dependency is assessed at Rs.1 2,0UO/— per annum. 14) Considering that deceased Dharampal Singh was aged about 25 years on the date o? the accident and his widow shown to be 22 years of age in the claim petition, multiplier of 18 selected by the Tribunal is appropriate. 15) By muitiplying the annual dependency of Rs.1 ZOOOI— with the Fnultiplier of 18, the compensation works out to Rs.2,16,0G0!—. The claimants are further entitled to receive a sum of Rs.10,000/'- towards funeral expenses, loss of estate and loss of consortium to the widow. The claimants, thus, become entitled to receive a totai sum of Rs.2,26,000/— as compensation for the death of deceased Dharampal Sahu in the motor accident. 16) Learned counsel for the parties submitted that with a View to avoid any possibie dispute between the parties about the period for which the ciaimants are entitied 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. 17) Considering all the relevant factors including the delay in disposal of the ciaim petition and the present appeal, and the fact that the insurance Company alone is not to be blamed for the entire delay in the matte‘rSWe quantify the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of,..compensation of Rs.75,14'4'f- at Rs.5,856/-. 18) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appenants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs.1,56,856/— awarded by the Tribunal is 3 enhanced to Rs.2,26,000l— with further quantified amount of interest of Rs.5,856/— on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.75.144l—. 1'9) Respondent No.3 The New lndia insurance Company “Limited is granted three months’ time for depositing the total sum of Rs.8’l,GfJO/'—. (Rs.75,1441- towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.8,8561— towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.75:144/—) before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 2U) No order as to costs. . Sd/- Chief Justice padma