HSGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BSLASPUR Division Bench Coram : Hon'bie Shri Jagdish Bhaila, Acting CJ. & Hon'ble Shri Diiip Raosaheb Deshmukh, J. Miscellaneous ApDeal t'C.) No.605 of 2007 ADpeiiants 1. Hembai, W/o Subranial, Aged CSaimants about 28 years, 2. Ku. Punam, D/o Late Subranlal, Aged about 8 years, 3. Kamiesh Kumar, S/o Late Subranial, Aged about 6 years 4. Ku. Pushpa, D/o Late Subranlal, Aged about 3 years Appellants No.2 to 4 Minor through guardian mothec Hembai, W/o Subranlai Aii R/o Faguram, P.S. Dabhra, Tahsil : Maikharoda, District : Janj'gir-Champa Respondents Non-AppIicants versus 1. Poshram, S/o Dataram, Aged about 25 years, R/o Fagurani, P.S. Dabhra, Tahsil: Malkharoda, District: Janjgir-Champa 2. United India insurance Company, Branch Office : Gopi Talkies Road, Raigarh Appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act Present : AppeIIants by Shri CJ.K.Rao, learned counsei. ORAL_QRDER , (Passed on 29th of June, 2007) The foilowhg oral order of the Court was passed by Ditip Raosaheb Defihmukh, J.: ^ Heard on I.A. No.01/2007 which is an application for amendment filed on behalf of the appellants. The application is aSiowed. Let the necessary amendment be carried out within three days. (2) Heard on admission. (3) Being aggrieved by the impugned award dated 20-03-2007 passed by iearned Additionai Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sakti in Motor Accident Claim Case No.28/2006, the appeliants/ciaimants have preferred this appeal. (4) The only point urged by the learned counsei for the appeilants in this appeai for enhancement of compensation of Rs.3,57,000/- awarded in a death case of one Subranial aged 30 years is that the learned Tribunal ought to have considered the daily income of the deceased, who was working as a Mason, at Rs.300/-. No other point was urged. (5) Upon perusal of the impugned award, we fihd that the deceased was working as a IVIason in a remote area of Tahsil Malkharoda. Hembal, the widow of the deceased was unabie to state as to what was the actual daily income of the deceased. Under these circumstances, we are of the opinion that the iearned Tribunal was wholly justified in taking the daily income of the deceased at Rs.100/- while assessing loss of dependency. In this view of the matter, there is no merit in this appeal. (6) The appeai, being devoid of merit, is accordingiy dismissed at the stage of admission. SdA Ag. Chief Ju^tice Sd/- Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh Judge r ^ ^