H§G§€ COURT OF CHHATTESGARH WE B§LA$PUR Q§Vi$§QN BENSH €QRAM: HQWBLE SHRI Rxé-MEEV @EFTA, OJ. 3a §€Q§¥V$LE SERa 3UN§L KQMAR $5MHA, J. Méscn Aggpaah Na 5% af 2W3 Gulab: S/o Kawal Singh Aged about 50 years Ram Prawd, S/o Guiab Aged bout 32 years Shix' Prasad, S/o Gmab, Aged about 8O years Kumad Dhaneshwari Bai Dfo Gulab, Aged about 18 yeays Ail R/s Gamrabhedi, Poet Beiwgondi; Them Gendatola, Tah and Distt Rajnandgaon (CG) VER$U$ ndemg Smt Chitra Dodke, W/o Chandrakant Q imams Decgke, aged abGut 40 yams, house N045, Shakarwara Chowk, Nagpur, Tahei! and digit Maharaehtra Naticnai insurance Company Limited Ehrough Div! Manager Aakaehganga C‘ompiex, SupeQe, Emteé, Distt Burg {CG} MéeeAggeeai undea‘ Seaikm 1% m: me Meier Vehidee ASL ’i983 Reep NewO Q) Preeent : Shri Anand Shukia, oounee! for me aepetiante. None for reepondeni No.1. Shi'i Geu‘iam Khetrapai, counsel for respondent No.2 QRER w5‘h &anuery, 2M6} The foiEowmg arder of the Court was oassed by Regeev Geme, Cm}: "é“ This is daimants’ appeai for enhancement of the sompensation awarded by the Fimi Additional Meter Accidents Ciaims TribunaL Rajnandgaon (for short “the Tribunal’) vide award éaYSQJ 28.i§1 .2902, passed in maxim Case NO. ?3!1 999. 2} Aa against the compemation 0f Rs.6,7’5,000./— daimeci by ihe appeimnwclaémams, unfortunate husband and chiids‘en of deceased Khorbaharin, by {Hing a claim petitian under Section 166 43f the Momr Ve’msies Act, fai’ he¥ deaih m the motar accident on 28c?2c’%898, the Tribunai awardea? a total sum cf RS.1,31,8G0/* as z ccmgaensaxion alang with interest @ 9% per annum from the date cf airing ofthe c§aim petitioh “mi the date 0f actua! payment. 3; $hri Anand Shukla, §earned counsei far the appellants vehemehtry argued that the Tribunal has erred in awarding tow cempensation of Rat ,31 ,800/— oniy. 4) Shrt Goutam Khetrapat; learned counsei for respondent No.2 - The Nationai insurance Company Limited, on the other hand, supported the award and contended that the compensatton of Rert,3t,80G/— awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances or” the present case. \ \ 5,; As the respondents have not ttled any appeal against the award, the findings recorded by the Tribunal that deceased Khorbaharin died on account of the injuries sustained by her in the motor accident on 28.12.1998; the‘ accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Commander Jeec; as the offending vehicle Commander Jeep on the date of the accident was insured with the Nationai insurance Cmnparw Limitecé, the Ensumnce Gemmny was imbie i0 pay compensatian t0 the daimants, have now attained f%n&!ity. That wart, iheae fmdmgs gre net under chailenge before us in this aweal. We, iherefore, affirm the above findings recorded by the Tribuml. f3} The claimant$ ihermeives pieaded that decea$ed Kharbaharm aged to earn Rs.1,200/— per month as Labeur. The T¥ibunai has accepted the claimants’ evidence abeut the income of the deceased and assessed her ieeome ai 'Rs.’i ,200/— per month. The eiaimanie, as seen eennet have any iegitimaie grievance about “e eeeeeement of the income Gf the deceased by ihe Tribunal. ?} The Tyi’eunai has rightly assessed the ciaimanis’ dependency by deducting the usuai 11’3“ of the income at the deceased towards her personal expenses. 8) Considering that deceased Khorbaharin wee found to be aged about 5D years by the Tribune! and her husband Guiab aise was shown to be 50 yeare of age, the muiiipiier of i3 seiecied by ihe Tribunai cannot be found fauii with. e) For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any scope for enhancement at the cempensation awarded by the Tribunei. 10) The appeai iiied by the appeiiants/ciaimants for enhancement of the compensation, therefore, ie iiebie te be dismissed and is hereby dismiesed. ' a:1) No arder as to costs. ‘ sir/— ‘1 Sunii Kumar Sinha s/r" ’ Judge ,» Sdl- Chief Justice s subbu .l