HIGH COURT OF CHHATTKGARH AT BILASPUR DIVIS10N BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, G.J. HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J Misc Appeal (Ct No.322 of 2009 Appellants Claimants Ram Bai, daughter of late Anand Ram Sahu, wife of Ram Dayal, aged about 40 years, resident of ^llage kampa, PS -Tumgaon, Distt Mahasamund(CG) Vishakha Bai, daughter of Isrte Anand Ram Sahu, wife of GO(M Sahu, aged about 38 years, resident of village Gouraghat, PS Arang, Distt Raipur (CG) Hemin Bai, daughter of Late Anand Ram Sahu, wife of Lagnu Sahu, ^ed about 36 years, resldent of village Bemcha, Police Station Mahasamund, Distt Mahasamund (CG) Chandrika Bai, Daughter of late Anand Ram Sahu, Wife of Khelu Ram Sahu, aged about 34 years, Resident of Village Jhalap, Present residence of village tempa, P.S. Tumgawi, Distt. Mahasamund (C.G.). VERSUS Respondents Kashi Ram Kanwar, son of Bharosa Ram Kanwar, Resident of village Khattidih, P.S. Tumgaon, Tahsll and Distt. Mahasamund (C.G.). (Tractor Owner) Chetan Dhruv son of Bishal Dhruv, Resictent of viltage Khattidih, P.S. Tumgaon, Tahsil and Distt. Mahasamund (C.G.). (Driver) SP<C7'. •z^ 3 Manager,Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd, Shop No.412, 413, 4th Floor, Ravi Bhawan, Jaisthambh Chowk, Raipur Distt. Ralpur (C.G. (Insurer) Miscellaneous Appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehictes Act Present : Shri V.K. Pandey, counsel for the appellants. Shri S.C. Verma, counset for respondents No.1 &2. Shri S.S. Rajput, counsel for respondentNo.3 ORDER (07th July, 2011) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. This is claimants' appeal for enhancement oS the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mahasamund (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 11.02.2009, passed in Claim Case No.144/2008. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.7,01 ,(X)0/- clalmed by the appellants/claimants, unfortunate married daughters of deceased Anand Ram, by fillng aclaim petltion under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act for his death in the motor accident on 07.03.2008, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.62,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of theclaim petition till thedate of actual payment. 3) The Tribunal held the insurerof the offending vehicle Tractor bearing registration No.CG-OSB/9801 liable to pay compensation to 1 r^3',s?' -^\ the claimants. The Tribunal assessed the income of tte deceased at Rs.1,500/- per month. By deducting 1/3"1 of Rs.1 ,500/- tcwvards the personal expenses ofthe deceased, the daimarts' dependewy was assessed at Rs.1,000/- per month and Rs.12,000/- per annum. By muttiplying the annuat dependency of Rs.12,000/- with the multiplier of 5, the compensation was worked out to Rs.60,000/-. By awardlng further sum of Rs.2,000/- towards funeral expens^, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.62,000/- as compaisation to the claimants for the death of their Tather Anand Ram in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.62,000/- @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment 4) Shri V.K. Pandey, learned counset for the appellants vehemently argued that the Tribunal has erred in awardlng only Rs.2,000/- towards Tuneral expenses and in not awardlng any sum towards loss of estate; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.62,000/-only. 5) Shri S.S. Rajput, leamed counsel for respondent No.3 the Reliance General Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Tractor, on the other hand, cont®idedthat as deceased Anand Ram was aged about 70 yeare, the compensation of Rs.62,000/- awarded by the Trlbunal cannot be termed as inadequate so as to warrant enhancement In thls appeal. ^ A 4 6) Shri S.C. Verma, learned counsel for respondents No.1 Kashi Ram Kanwar and No.2 Chetan Dhmv, owner and driver of the offending vehicle Tractor also supported the award. 7) Deceased Anand Ram was aged aibout 70 years on the date of the accident. The claimants are his four married daughters aged about 40 years, 38 years, 36 years, and 34 years, respectively. 8) On due consideration of the submissions of teamed counsel for the parties and the above mentioned broad features of the case and in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Smt. Manjuri Bera Vs. Oriental Insurance Conyany Limited, reported in 2007 AIR SCW -1962, we are satisfied that the compensation of Rs.60,000/- assessed by the Tribunal on accourtf of loss of dependency cannot be found fault with. 9) Nevertheless, the Tribunal certainly has erred in awardlng only Rs.2,000/- towards funeral expenses and in not awarding any sum towards toss of estate. 10) Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, we are of the opinion that further award of lump-sum of Rs.10,000/- inclusive 'of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation would make the compensation of Rs.62,000/- awarded by the Tribunal as just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances ofthe present case. 11) The appeal Tiled by the appellants/claimants for enhancement of the compensation, therefore, is allowed in part. The ctaimants are awarded further sum of Rs.10,000/- inclusive of rz^ interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation, in addition to the sum of Rs.62,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. 12) Respondent No.3 the Reliance General Insurance Company LimltKl is grantal three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.10,000/- before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 13) No order as to costs. Sd/- ChiefJustice Sd/- Rangnath Chandrakar Judge subbu