a y I; "ife iN'SL! Claimants [isc. Appeal No. 134§of 2004 1 Smt. Amrika Bai aged about 35 years W/o late Amrit Lat Sahu 2 Toman Lal, aged about 16 years, S/o late Shri Amrita Lal Sahu Non-applicants [Driver) 3 4 5 Parak Das Sahu, S/o late Shri Amrita Lal Sahu aged about 1,4 years. Chhabi Lal S/o late' Shri Amrita Lal Sahu aged about 12 years. Prit Lal S/o late Shri Amrita Lal Sahu All minor through natural guardian mother smt. Amrika Bai W/o late Shri Amrit Lal Sahu All R/o Village Surgi Tahsil and Distt, Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 3. 4. 5. Pradeep Kumar aged about 32 years, S/'o Ghanshyam Nishad R/o village Chichalgondi Thana & Tah. Gundardehi Distt. Durg (C.G.) Kapil Sahu aged about 40 years s/o Revva Ram Sahu R/o Village Surgi Tah & distt. Rajnandgaon (C.G.) Nationat Insurance Company Ltd. through Branch Manager Branch Office Kamptee Line, Rajnandgaon. Khorbahara Sahu, s/o Nand Lal Sahu aged about 70 years. Smt. Banwasa Bai W/o Khorbahara Sahu aged about 68 years both 4 & 5 R/o Viltage Surgi Thana Lalbagh Talfi. & Distt. Rajnandgaon (C.G.) i Memorandum of aRpeal under Section 173 of the Motor ».<• -IfflOO Present: Shri Anand Shukla, counsei forthe appellants. None for respondents No.1, 2, 4 and 5 though sen/ed. Shri UNS Deo and Shri Pawan Shrivastava, counset for respondent No.3. ith The followina order of the Court was passec This is claimants' appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunat, iajnandgaon (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 26 10.2004, passed in Claim Case No. 122/2001. 2. As against the compensation of Rs.17,05,000/- claimed by the appeliants/ claimants, unfortunate widow and minor children of deceased Amrit Lal Sahu by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act for his death in the motor accident on 01.07.2001, the Trlbunal awarded a total sum of Rs.2.42,400/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actuat payment. 3. The Tribunat on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held that deceased. Amrrt Lal Sahu died on account of t'ne injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 01.07.2001; the a.ccident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Minibus bearing registration No. MP-29-E/0004; as the above offending vehicle Minibus on the date ofthe accident was insured with the National Insurance Company Limited and the Ihsurance company could not establishany breach of the policy conditions, the insurance Company was liabte 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 Tribuna! assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.2,400/- per month. By deducting 1,/3rd of Rs.2,400/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency wasassessed at Rs.1,600/- per month and Rs.19,200/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.19,200/- with the muitiplier of 12, the compensation was worked out to Rs.2,30,400/-. By awarding further sum or Rs.12,000/- under other heads, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.2,42,400./- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Amrit Lal Sahu in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensaticn of Rs.2,42,400/- @ 6% per annum from the date of filing ofthe ctaim petition tilt the date of actual payment. 6. Shri Anand Shukla, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal has erred selecting t.he lower of 12 and in awarding low compensation of Rs.2,42,400/-only. 7. Shri UNS Deo and Shri Pawan Shrivastava, tearned counsel for respondent No.3 the National Insurance Company Limited, on the other hand, supported the award and contended that, the comperisation of Rs.2,42,400/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 8. In a motor accident claim case what is important is that the compensation to be awarded by the Courts/Tribunal should 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.2,42,400/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 10. As the claimants themseives-pleaded that deceased Amrit Lai Sahu used to earn Rs.2,400/- per month and the Tribunal assessed his income at Rs.2,400/- per month, the appellants/ ctaimants cannot have any legitimate grievance about the assessment_of the income of the deceased by the Tribunal. 11. The claimants' dependency also has been rightly assessed by the Tribunal by deducting the usual 1/3 ofthe income ofthe deceased towards his personal expenses. ;i:i 12. The multiptler of 12 selected by the Tribunal considering that deceased Amrit Lal Sahu was shown to be 40 years of age in his postmortem report, is certainly on the lower side and requlres reconsideration. 13. In ouropinion, muttiplier of 15 would be appropriate in the present case in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt) and Others Versus DeShi Transport Corporation and another, reported in (2009) 8 SCC 121 wherein multiplier of 15 was prescribed for| the age group between 36-40 years. 14. By multiplying the annuai dependency of Rs.19,200/- with the muitiplier of 15, the compensation works out to Rs.2,88,000/-. By adding further sum of Rs.15,000/- under other heads, the claimants become entitled to receive a total sum of Rs.3,03,000/- as compensation for the death of deceased Amrit Lal Sahu in the motor accident. 15. Learned counsel for the parties submltted that with a vsew to avoid any possibte dispute between the parties about the period for which the claimants are entitled 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. 16. Considering ail the relevant factors including the delay in disposal of the claim petition and the present appeal and the fact that Insurance Companv alone is not to be blamed for the entire •Kfc' !(»*» y '•;.r~~>. padma deiay in the matter, we quantify the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.60,600/- at Rs.4,400/- 17. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation is al!owed in part. The compensation of Rs.2,42,400/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.3,03,000/- with further quantified amount of interest of Rs.4,400/- on the enhanced amount of CQmpensation of Rs.60,600/-. 18. Respondent No.3 the National Insurancte Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.65,000/- (Rs.60,600/- towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.4,WO/- towards quantified amount of intecest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.60,600/-) before the concerning Claims Tribunal. i 19. No order as to costs. sd/- Quef Justice Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge