^.F, • '7^ C.J. Claimants 1 Jagje'evan Das, S/o Chatur Sahu, about 48 years 2 Horan Kumari. D/o Jagjeevan Das, aged about 16 years 3 Ashwani, s/o Jagjeevan Das, about14years 4 Kamini, D/o Jagjeevan Das, about 11 years 5 Yuvraj, s./o Jagjeevan Das, about 10 years No.2 to 5 minors, through natura! guardian father Jagjeevan Das, S/o Chaturram Sahu, aged about 45 years All R/o Vlitage Chilfi, Tahsi! " Saja, District Durg (CG) Madan Lal, S/o Akturam Kaushai, about 29 years, Occupatlon ~ Bus Driver, R/o Viliage Birandra Nagar, PS Sahaspur Lohara.. Dlstrict Kablrdham (CG) (Driver) •Kaiias'n Rajput, S/o Bhagwat Singh Rajput, Occupatin ~ Ovvner; -R/o Ambedkar Chowk, Shankarnagar, PS i\4ohan Nagar, Durg, tahsi! and District Durg (CG) (Owner) The ?v<!ew India insurance Company Limsted, through Branch Manager, Branch Office Parakh Bhawan, Statlon Road, Durg, District Durg (CG) (Insurer) Motor Vehlcje Act Present : Shri AK Prasad and Shri Roshan Verma, counseE for the appelSants. None for respondents No.1 and 2. Shri Shivendu Pandya and Shri GVK Rao, counsei for respondent No.3. !St The foiiowing order of the Court was by l, CJ. This is daimants' appea! for enhancement of the compensation awarded by t'ne Additional Motor Accident Ciaims Tribunal, Bemetara, district Durg (for short !the Tribunal') vide award dated 10.04.2008, in Claim Case No.7/2008. 2) As against the compensation of Rs. 11,00,0007- cjaimed by the appeiiants/claimants, unfortunate husband and minor chiidren of deceased Heminbai by fiiing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicies Act, for her death in the motor accident on 12.12.2007, the Tribuna! av^arded a total sum of Rs.1,82,500/- as cornpensation aiong wit'n interest @ 6% per annum from the date of the fillng of the claim petition tii! the date of actual payment. 3) The Tribunal on a ciose serutiny of the entire evidence led before it held that deceased Heminbai died on account of the injuries sustained by her in the motor accident on 12.12.2007; the t ..y ^ ^ ^- ,,^i'f'^-:^ >.:^"".-.4."^- ^a i .^' '•"^-.^.^ ^.^?:'" accsdent occurred due to rash and neg!igent driving of the driver of the offending vehicie bus bearing registration Nos.CG-007 E/0453; as the above offendlng vehicle bus on the of the accident was insured with the New india insurance Company Limited and the Insurance Company could not^estabiish any breach of the poiicy conditions, the insurance Company was Elable to pay compensatlon to the daimants. 4) As the respondents have not fiied any appeai against the award, the above findings recorded by the Tribunal have now attained flnallty. 5) The Tribunal the Income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- per annurn. By deductlng 1/3rd of Rs.15,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the ciaimants' dependency was at Rs.10,000/- per annum. By multipiying the annual dependency of Rs.10,000/- with the muitiplierof 16, the cQmpensation was worked out to Rs.1,60,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.22,500/" under other heads, the Tribunal awarded a tota! sum of Rs.1,82,500/- as compensation to the cteimants for the death of deceased Hemlnbai in the motor accident. The Tribunal further djrected payment of Interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.1,82,500/- @ 6% per annum from the date of tiie filing of the cEaim petitlon till the date of actuai payment. 6) Shri AK Prasad and Shri Roshan Verma,, learned counsel for t'ne s.ppellants submitted that the Tribunai has erred in assessing ^\ ^. 4 the income ofthe deceased at Rs.15,000/- per annum oniy; and in avvarding low compensation of Rs.1 ,82,500/~ only. 7) Shri Shivendu Pandya and Shri GVK Rao, Searned counsei for respondent No.3 tEie New India insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicie bus on the other hand supported the award and c-ontended that the compensation of Rs.1,82,500/-, awarded by the Tribunai is just and proper compensation in the.facts and circumstances ofthe case. 8) True, the claimants that Hemjnbal used to eam Rs.4,000/- per month frorn agricujture, the evidence ied in that beha'f vv'as not of clinching nature. We, therefore, do not find any fault In the approach of the Tribuna! in discarding the ciaimants' evidence about the income of the deceased. 9) Nevertheiess, the income of the by the Tribunai in the year 2007 st Rs.15,000/- per annum is certainiy on the lower and requires reconsideration. 10) Considering that deceased Heminbai was aged about 37 on the date of the accident, we are of the oplnion that, she couid have easily earned Rs.70-75/- per day even by working as an ynskiiied iabour in the year 2007. We therefore, propose to re-compute the compensation taking the income of the deceased at Rs.2,000/- per month and Rs.24,000/- per annum. 11) By deducting the usual 1/3l'd of Rs.24,000/- towards the persona! expenses of the deceased, the ciaimants' dependency is at Rs.16,000/- per annum. 5 12) The claimants are husband and chlfdren of deceased Heminbai. Ciaimant Jagjeevan Das, husband of the was shown to be 48 years of age in the ciaim petition, and the other ciaimants are his minor chiidren, who are primariiy dependent on hirn. We are, therefore, of the opinion that multipiier of 13 would be appropriate In the present in vlew ofthe dictum ofthe Apex Cou?-t in the of aitd Trsrssport reported in 6 Court 121, wherein multip'ier of 13 has been prescribed for the age group betv^een 46-50 years. 13) By muitiplying the annuai dependency of Rs.16.000/- Vs'lth the muitiplier of 13, the compensation works out to Rs.2,08,000/-. The claimants are further entitled to receive Rs.5,000/- tov^ards funeral expenses; Rs.5,000/- towards ioss of consortium to the husband; and Rs.5,000/- for ioss of estate. The claimants, tEius, become entitied to receive a tota! sum of Rs.2,23;000/- as compensation for the death of deceased Heminbal in the motor accident. 14) The clalmants are further awarded a sum of Rs.4,500/- as quantlfied amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.40,500/-. 15) For the foregoing reasons, the appea! filed by the claimants for enhancement of the compensation is aiiowed in part. The compensation of Rs.1,82,500/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.2,23,0007- with further quantified arnount of interest of Rs.4,500/- on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.40,500/-. --- \'•\ v •'\ padma 16) Respondent No.3 the New India Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositinQ the tota! sum of Rs.45,000/- (Rs.40,500/- towards enhanced amount of compensation -^- Rs.4,500/- tovvards quantified amount of Interest on t'ne enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.40,500/-) before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 17) No order as to costs. —— Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge