I'BLE r : -/) 3hagwat Prasad Yadav, S/o Late Fhaauwa Ram Yadav, aaed about 40 ihagat Ram Yadav, late Fhaguwa Ram Yadav, aged about 45 ygars, Soth are residents of Behind Nehru Nagar, Nandanwar Atachakki, Bhilai, P.S. Supela, Tahsil & Distt. Durg, (C.G.). Versus Shivnandan Sahu ® N; S/o Bisahu Ram Sahu, aaed years, R/o Amapara, Dun Mohan Nagar, Tahsi! & Di (C.G.) friver of Mini Bus No.i th.( P.S. Durg 2 Prakash Kumar Rathor R/o Matkai Rathore S/'o Ramesh , aged about 37 years, , Rajnandgaon, tahsil Igaon (C.G.) ,G! 3 The Ci iranch Manager, lyationai ;ompgny Limited, Kamthi Rajnandgaon, Di'stt Rajnandgaon (CG) Lfne jah :- Dlvlsional M; ationa! Insurance Company Limited, ivisional Offlce - Akashganga, upela, Bhifai, Tahsil & Distt Durg , •^3; -7\ Ih 'resegt: Shri Jitendra Gupta, learned counsel appeiiants. The foilowina order of Court was pass <-., sra aatea Shri Jitendra Gupta, learned counsel for the appetiants is heard on admission. 2. The appeliants are seeking enhancement of the CQmpensation awarded bv 7 Additionai Motor Accidents Claims Tribunai Durg (for short 'the Tribunal') vide awar 17.07.2009, passed in claim case No. 131/2008. 3. As against the compensation of Rs.6,40,000/- cl appellants/ claimants, unfortunate sons of deceased M( by fiiing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Act for her death in the motor accident on 23.06. Trlbunal avi'arded a tota! sum of Rs.1,30,500/- as compensation aiong Vi'ith interest @ 6% per annum from the d.gte of filing of the ciaim petition till the date of actuai payment. /-. 4. Shri Jitendra Gupta, leamed counsel for the appellants vehemently argued that the compensation of Rs.1,30,500/- awarded by the Tribunal is too iow. Vehicles 3, the /£ " % f 1 fv ':. <-/y 5. Though the ciairpiants pleaded that their mother deceased Mantora Bai used to earn iRs.4,000/- per month, the evidence led in that behalf was not of ciinching nature. The Tribunal, therefore, assessed her Income at Rs.3,000/- per month on its own estimate. On due consideration, we do not find any infirmify in the assessment of the income of the deceased by the Tribunal at Rs.3,000/- per month and Rs.36,000/- per annum. 7. The Tribunal has been quite liberal in deducting only 1/3 of the income of the deceased towards her personal expenses though the deduction In thst behalf could have been to the extent of 50% of the income of the deceased as both the claimants are her major sons aged about 40 years and 45 years having their own independent income. 8. As deceased Mantora Bai was shown to be 60 years of age in the claim petition, the selection of multiplier of 5 by the Tribuna! cannot be found fault with. 9. For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any scope Tor enhancement ofthe compensaiion awarded by the Tribunal. 10. The appeal Tiled by the appellants/ c^ajmants for eahancement of the compensation, therefore, is tiable to.-bs dismissed and is hereby dismissed summariiy. Sd/- ChiefJustice Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge SUbbU