K» c c ^ l'p? ^ HIGHCOURTOFCI-IHATTISGARHATBILASPUR DIVISIONBENCH SOR^: HON8BLEaHRIRAJEE^©Um^,C.J.& NON'BLESHRIRANGNATHCHANiRAKAR,,]. ApRellants Giaimants Responctents Non-appJicants IVIisc. Appeal No. 1Q9S of 2004 1. Gajra Baj, W/o GhaJfram, aged about 50years. ^^' ::.1:1:'--:-'-1'^^;;1;^'^ .••:;':;:-,.'Y';./:.;.!:':11:'/' ' 2. ^OQr^, S/o Chajtram Tanclekar, aged about 25 years. •-S. • '• .' ' •• .:' -'-; '. . . .. '•• '.^..•-•.. .....;;...•.,." —'.•.•";,.; ."; . .. i ^.•.: ;'•.•• ;. ...•••" 3. Yadavram, S/o.Gjhaitram, aged aboutSOyears.j All are R/o. Kashiram Nagar, Raipur, Distt. Raipur(C.G.) 1 :VERSUSI<'1:'--1' ',. <'! il..l:: ..'.,:...••/..^ 1; Mohd. Masim, S^Q l^lohd. Ism^il, f^o Trimurti Nagar, P.S. Ganj, Oi^t'i^t ^Raipur.': ^;: l':l';.^ll',: ~\jj^,;:,';:•;.,;' -..^;^^^^^^^^^^ 2. Rajendra Slngh, j.S/o.-ChMecfilill Sjngh, RM :Krjshr^a N^gar,g; ^ (^ytan Hjgh Schoo^^^^^^P Raipur (C.G.)i,;- W' ;|; -.'' :l'::f':^: ,;v'^i.r':: ;!.:1:',;-: s ' '.:1 ' • •••:; ! "- 3. The New India Jnsyirance Cpmpany Limjted, through DiyisiQnai ^ffjc^^ Kacha^ari Chowk,^*|ai1]j%oad,~^l|aij3ur ws" '^&..^ ;-.^-^«-^" ^^^T''' '^ ' •-:.^':: "^'^"^" •?'^.'"i; •:^c-';-...':^ -,. '-•^^1'^'^^^^^^^^^ ADDealunclerSection 173 oftMelVlotorVeniclesAGt. 1988 Present: StiriS.O.Verma;leamedcounself6rthe .appeli^nfe., :,, :'•••.\'":', ;,;Y, ..•~ •'r-.j,::,.: ,,1,hl:;' ^'^ None for respondents;No. 1 &2. ' | ^ Smt. Chitra Shnva^ava, learned courisel for respondentNo.3. ^^^^^^^ - QRDER sth (5tn0ctog3er,2010) c s !» c ^ ^ The fbllowjng order of the Court was passed by RajeevGupta,C.J. This is claimants' appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the First Addjtional Motor Accident Claims Tnbunal, Raipur (for shbrt 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 27.04.2004, passedinClaimCaseNo. 108/2003. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.7,15,000/- claimed by the appeltants/claimants, unfortunate widpw and major sons of deceased Chaitram, by filing a claim petition under Section 163-A of the IVlQtor VehJcles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 06.05.2003, the Tribunal awardecl a total sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation along with inNrest @ 6% per annum from the dateOffilJng oftheclaJm petjtion till the date of actual payment. , , 3) The Tribuna! on a close scrutiny of the ehtire evidence led before it held that deceased Chaitram died dn account ofthe injurjes sustained by him in the mptor accident on 06.05.2003; •.-.;-^^-- the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Minibus bearing registration No.C.G-04 ZA/0620; as the above offending vehjde Minibus on the date of the accident was insured with the New India Insurance Company Limited and the Insurance Company could not establish any breach of the policy conditjons, the Insurance Companywasliabletopaycompensatjontotheclaimants. ^:^^ss^^ :t^'^ "^iiite^ ' : %. ...^:N||. ,1 '<^%I^^ c '¥ •!!LN iyi: c :r •\, ^ 4) As therespondents have not fiied any appeai agajnstthe award, the above findings recorded by the Tribunal have now attainedfinalitv. 5) The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.50/- per day, Rs.1,500/- per month. By deducting 1/3rd of Rs.1,500/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the ciaimants'depenciency was assessed at Rs.1,000/- per month and Rs.12,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.12,000/- with the multiplier of 8, the compensation was worked out to Rs.96,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.4,000/- under other heads, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- as corhpensation to the ctaimants for tbe death of deceased Chaitram in the motor accident. The Tnbunaifurtherdireetedpaymentofinterestonthe above amount of cQmpensation of Rs.1,00,000/- @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition tiil the dateof aetua! payment. •-.-^^- 6} /Shri S.C. Verma; learned counsel for the appeiiants submitted that the Tribuna! has erred in not aecepting the ctaimants' evidence about the income of the deceased and in assessing his income at Rs.50/- per day and Rs.1,500/- per month only; in selecting the lower muitiplier of 8; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- only. ^!^^^-: li"l '^ f 4 c 1 c ^ 7) Smt. Chitra Shrivastava, Jearned counset for respondent No.3 the New India Insuranee Company Limjted, on the other hand supported the award and contended that as deceased Chaitram was aged about 60 years, the compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation inthefactsandcircumstancesofthepresentcase. 8) True, the ciaimants pleaded that deceased Chaitram used to earn Rs.200-250/- per day, the evidence led lin that behalfwas not of clinching nature. We, therefore, do not find any fault in the approach of the Tribunal in discarding the claimants' evidence about the incomeofthedeceased. 9) Nevertheless, the income of the deceased assessed by the Tribunal at Rs-50/- per day and Rs.1,500/- perlmonth in the year 2003 is certajniy on thelower side and requiresfrecQnsideration. 10) Considering that deceased Chaitram even by working as an unskilled labour could have easily eamed Rs.80-90/- per day in the year 2003, x^ropose to recompute the compensation by taking theincome ofthedeeeased atRs.30,000/-perannum. 11) Considering that claimant No'.2 Yograj and claimant No.3 Yadavram were majoi' sons of the, deceased, aged about 25 years and 30 years respectively and were having their own independent income and as such only ciaimant wholly dependent on the income of the deceasecJ was claimant No.1 Gajra Bai, widow ofthe deceased, we deem it proper to deduct 50% of the ^^y^ .-^^^'^ ^'^':fl!l/"%: Wate^. i mK^'^ c s ^ 9 c ^•^ income of the deceased towards his personal expenses. The claimants' dependency, thus, is assessed at Rs.15,000/- per annum. 12) Considering that deceased Chaitram was shown to be 60 years of age in his postmortem report, we are of the opinion that multjplier of 9 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 Delhi Transport Corporation and another, reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121, wherein multiplier of 9 has been prescribed for the age group betweeh 56-60 years. 13) By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.15,000/-with the muitiplier of 9, the compensation works out to Rs.1,35,000/-. The claimants are further entitled to receive Rs.15,000/- under other permissibje heads. The claimants, thus, become entitled to receive a total sum of Rs.1,50;000/- as compensation for the death of deceased Chaitram in the motor aecident. 14) The claimant^gre further awarded a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.50,000/-. 15) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appeilants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs.1 ,00,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.1,50,000/- with further quantified •M^-v^ '•w—^ "^.y.' -1^ 1^' 1 subbu c; amount of interest of Rs.5,000/- on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.50;000/-. 16) Respqndent No.3 The New India Insurance Company Limited is grantedthree months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.55,000/- (Rs.50,000/- towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.5,000/- towards quantified amount of interest on the enhaheed amountof compensation of Rs.50,000/-) before theconcerning ClaimsTribunal. i 17) No order as to costs. Sd/- Chief Justice \- 'r Sd/- ;R.N.Chandrakar ^ judge f .•-•^.^<-.