HIGHCOURTOFCHHATTISGARHATBILASPUR Division Bench Coram:- Hon'bleShriJa9dishBhalla,Actin9C.J.& Hon'ble Shri DiJip Raosaheb Deshmukh, J. ADpellants Claimants :i U ^l i; Respondehts Non-applicants ^. MA(QNo.896f2007 1. Smt. Suwarna Nayak, Age-46 Yrs, W/o Late Shn Jai Ram Nayak, By Caste-Gound (Adivasi) 2. Tej Ram, @.TEram Nayak,|Age-18Yrs, S/0 Late Shri Jai Ram Nayak, By Caiste-Gound ^divasi) | 3. Nityanand Nayak,(Minor) Ajge-14 Yrs., S/0 Late Shri Jai Ram Nayak, By Caste-GQund (Adjvasi) j Minor represented by the appellant No.1, Smt.SuwamaNayak, j VWO Late Shri Jai Ram Nayak AIJ theabove are R/o-StatiQn Colony, s P.S. & Tahsil-Arang, Distt:- iRaipur (CG) AtpresentallareR/o-Railw^yStation Colony-Belsonda.P.S.TahiMahasamund, Distt:- Mahasamund (CG) 1 VERSUS 1. Santosh Yadav. Age-25 Yrs. S/o Bhavsagar Yadav, By profession Driver. R/o:N-Se\^dapulli^ Distt.Hugli (W.B) lDriveroftheTruckNo.W.B.39/6964] 2. Sapan Sadhu Khan, Age-Yrs. S/0 N.SadhuKhan. R/0:- Sardhapalli, Distt. Badreshwar (W.B^ 1 Other Add. Hardipur, Durgapur, Hyfen-13, Vardhaman,(W.B.) pwner of the Truck No.WS. 39/6964] 3. The New India Insurance Com. Ltd. Divisional Office at Madina Building, Jail Road, Raipur, Distt.Raipur(CG) B.O.-Sherampur, MahatmaGandhiRoad, Mumbai, Bearing Policy No.512501/31/05/01445. Period from dtd. 21.05.05 to 20.05.06. ^ '\ ^ff'^^S':^-^'^^ Priya ^ [Ins. Com.SftheTruc^No.iW.B. 39^964] .V : .'.'.;.' • •• . . Memo of Misc.ADDeal underSection473ftheIVl6torVel'iicleAct:- Present: ShriJ.A.Lohani, counsel for the appellants. "ORAlIORDER .1;,, ;.-,1.-. •, ; ^ ~ (Passed on 18th June, 2007) The following oral order of the Court was passed by Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh, J. Heard. (1) Being aggrieved by the impugned award dated 04.10,2006 passed by learned 2 Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Mahasamund in claim case No.81/2006, the appellants have preferred this appeal. (2) The only point urged by the learned counsel forjthe appellants in this appeal for enhancement of compensation in a death case of a salariedemployeeaged49yearsisthatthecomp6nsati0nawardedbythe leamedTribunalisnotjustandreasonablecompensation. ' (3) We have perused the impugned order. Although the deceased employee was drawing a net salary of Rs.4,112A-, the Tribunal assessed the net salary at Rs.4,500/- after taking into consideratipn the incremehts which the deceased would have earned and after dedueting 1 /3rc^ amouht towards personal expenses, th<e Tribunal applied the correct multiplier of '"^.:.. : • ' " ! l:t '.•li- :1'' : -i'. :1':'. • •./ 1.. - 11 and awarded Rs.3,96,000/- towards loss of dependency. To this, the Tribunal added Rs.2,000/- towards funeral expenses, Rs.20,000/- towards loss of consortium, Rs.20,000/- towards lossof estate and Rs.10,000/- for loss of love and affection. (4) In this view of the matter, the learned Tribunal has rightly awarded Rs.4,48,000/- as compensatipn which, in ourwell considered opinion, is justand reasonabiecompensation. (5) As a resutt, there is no merit in this appeal, which is accordingly dismissed atthestage ofadmission. Sd/- , Ac^mg-<.mi<er3ustice '\ '"r'"'^^ T^^$%% '•::,*.-:^-^,''yy^.,:'.'" ^^^^^^;: —<-f^»;-^^.. w^,^: ,^.<^:'^.^,.^.' ^^^^^ ^^^s^;*;.^. /'?W^<!.»."^"^1.^?, ^^^^"•^•.^•..^•.•.'.f-. Sd/- DiUp Raosaheb Deshmukh Judge rr^l -^ ;i^-jr?-T^.-;,....-.,,-^