HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J. Misc. Appeal (C) No.811 of 2010 ^'^ Appellants Respondents Driver Owner Insurer Smt Tijai Sahu, w/o Late Rajkumar Sahu, aged about 42 years Lobhan Sahu, s/o Late Rajkumar Sahu, aged about 23 years Vishnu Sahu, s/o Late Rajkumar Sahu, aged about 19 years Ku Jam Bai, d/o Late Rajkumar Sahu, aged about 16 years Ku Tomin, d/o Late Rajkumar Sahu, aged about 13 years Appellant No.4 & 6 are minors through legai guardian mother Smt Tijai Bai Sahu, w/o Late Rajkumar Sahu, aged about 42 years All r/o Village - Songin Kachhar, Post - Aasra, Police Station & Tahsil Dongargaon, District Rajnandgaon (CG) VERSUS Vardhraj Sharma, s/o Kamlakant Sharma, aged about 30 years, r/o Badodara Tarsa Vyankatesh Logesh Steek Surat, Police Station - Surat, District Surp.t (Gujrat) Driver. Kama! Ku'ma!- Goyal 80/1 B Fairs Line Koika'.a 700012 ((West Bengal), ;.•;[ present Vardhman Nagar, Piot No.75, Nagpur, District - Nagpur (Maharashtra) Reliance General Insurance Company Limited, Oswal Chamber, -s, i I 1 ?'? .Si' "^!.,. ^y -y •^S%3S<yS";i" .A.C.No.811 of 2010. ^^ 2nd Floor (Second Floor) 2, Church Line Kolkata (West Bengal) 700001 through the Branch Manager, Shop No.412, 413 Fourth Floor, Ravi Bhawan, Jay Stambha Chowk, Raipur (CG) Misc. Appeal under Section 173 of the IVIotor Vehicle Act. Present: Shri Goutam Khetrapal and Shri Rakesh Sahu, counsel for the appellants. Shri Sourabh Sharma, counsel for respondent No.3 ORDER (01st September, 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 Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rajnandgaon (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 31.03.2010, passed in Claim Case No.08/2008. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.17,50,000/- claimed by the appellants/ claimants, unfortunate widow, major sons and minor daughters of deceased Rajkumar Sahu, by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 10.11 .2007, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.4,22,000/- as compensatipn along with interest @ 7% 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 entireevidence led before it held that deceased Rajkumar Sahu died on account of MAC.No. 811of 2010. the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 10.11.2007; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Truck bearing registration No. MH 06 AC 4233; as the above offending vehicle Truck on the date of the accident was insured with the Reliance General Insurance Company Limited and the Insurance Company could not establish any breach ofthe policy conditions, the Insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimants. 4) As the respondents have not 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.4000/- per month. By deducting about 1/3rd of Rs.4000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.2,500/- per month and Rs.30,0007- per annum. By multiplying annual dependency of Rs.30,000/- with the multiplier of 13, the compensation was wbrked out to Rs.3,90,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.32,000/- under other heads, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.4,22.000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Rajkumar Sahu in the rtiotor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.4,22,000/- @ 7% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 4 MAC.No. 811 of 2010. ^l 6) Shri Goutam Khetrapal and Shri Rakesh Sahu, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that though the Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.4,000/- per month, it has erred in deducting more than 1/3 towards personal expenses of the deceased; and in selecting the lower multiplier of13. 7) Shri Sourabh Sharma, learned counsel for respondent No.3, Reliance General Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Truck, on the other hand, submitted that the compensation of Rs.4,22,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 8) Though learned counsel for the appellants has not challenged the assessment of the income of the deceased by the Tribunal at Rs.4,000/- per month, for our satisfaction, we have examined the evidence available on record in regard to income of the deceased and we are satisfied that the Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.4,000/- per month. The annual income ofthe deceased, thus,would be Rs.48,000/-. 9) The Tribunal though in para 14 of the award has mentioned that only 1/3 of the income of the deceased was being deducted towards his personal expenses, the Tribunal has erred in assessing the claimants' annual dependency at Rs.30,000/- only in place of Rs.32,000/-. We, therefore, propose to recompute the compensation taking the claimants' annual dependency at Rs.32,000/-. M.A.C.No.811 of 2010. 10) The multiplier of 13 selected by the Tribunal considering that deceased Rajkumar Sahu was shown to be 45 years of age in his postmortem report, is also on the lower side. In our opinion, multiplier of 14 would be appropriate in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt) and Others Versus Delhi Transport Corporation and another, reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121, wherein multiplier of 14 has been prescribed for the age group between 41-45 years. 11) By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.32,000/- with the multiplier of 14, the compensation works out to Rs.4,48,000/-. By adding the further sum of 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 become entitled to receive a total sum of Rs.4,63,000/- as compensation for the death of deceased Rajkumar Sahu in the motor accident. 12) The claimants are further awarded a sum of Rs.4,000/- towards quantified amount of interest on .the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.41,000/-. '13) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation is altowed in part. The compensation of Rs.4,22,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.4,63,000/- with furi:her quantified amount of interest of Rs.4,000/- on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.41,000/-. 14) Respondent No.3 Reliance General Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum MAC.No. 811 of 2010. ^ of Rs.45,000/- (Rs.41,000/- towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.4,000/- towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.41,000/-) before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 15) No order as to costs. .^n~-. __ Sd/- ChiefJustice R.N.Chandrakar Judge