...•?^-^^ J g / ::-,;--.<<' HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR f^£,] DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, CJ. HON'BLE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINHA, J. ApDellants Respondents Misc, Appeal No. 940 of 2004 1. Mahaveer Prasad, s/o Sanna Ram aged about 43 years, 2. Smt. Manti Bai w/o Shri Mahveer Prasad, aged about 38 years, Both are by caste Urawn r/o. Village Harradipa Patratoli, Tahsil and distt. JashpurC.G. VERSUS 1. Kamleshwar Bhagat @ Kamlesh Bhagat, aged about 35 years, s/o Shobha Ram Bhagat, village Harradipa Patratoli Tahsil & Distt. Jashpur (C.G). 2. The National Insurance Company Ltd. Gumbla Branch Office Palkoat Road Gumbla (Jharkhand) MEMORANDUM OF APPEALUNDER SECTION 173 OF THE WIOTOR VEHICLESACT Present: Shri Sanjeet Sharma, counsel for the appellants. Shri N.K. Malviya, counsel for respondent No.1. .Shri Goutam Khetrapal, counsel for respondent No.2. 'ORDER (04th April, 2011) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. ^•^:;llsls:i^ ;£aEE ::^^-, ^% The unfortunate parents of deceased Dilip Bhagat are the appellants beforeus in this appeal for enhanGement df fhe compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jashpur (for short 'the Ttibunal') vide award dated 14.07.2004, passed in Claim Case No. 15/2003. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.5,50,000/- claimed by the appellants/ claimants unfortunate parents ofdeceased Dilip Bhagat by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 19.04.2002, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.87,000/-as compensation along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of passing of the award till the date of actual payment. 3) The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held that the daimants' son Dilip Bhagat died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 19.04.2002; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Tractor bearing registration No.M.P.26-E/5863; though the above offending vehicle Tractor on the date of the accident was insured with the National Insurance Company Limited, it was a case of breach of the policy conditions/inasmuch as, the Tractor was carrying Baraat and the same was registered and""insured for agricultural purpose and as such, the Insurance Company w.as not liable to pay compensation to the claimants and the liability in that behalf was that of the owner of the Tractor. ^uaiiiatti ^ .^., ^...T^a^, .. -B K/ ••Siaili 4) The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.600/- per month. By deducting 1/3rd of Rs.600/- towards the personal expenses of thfe deceased, the daimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.400A- per month and Rs.4,800/- per annum.By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.4,800/- with the multiplier of 15, the compensation was worked out to Rs.72,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.15,000/- under other heads, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.87,OQO/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of theirson Dilip Bhagat in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount ofcompensation of Rs.87,QOO/- @ 9% per annum from the date of passing of the award till the date of actual payment. 5) The Tribunal further directed that as the insurer of the Tractor was exonerated from its liability to pay compensation to the claimants, the insurer shall be entitled torecover the amount Rs.54,037/- deposited by the insurer under 'no fault liability' from the claimants. 6) Shri Sanjeet Sharma, learned counsel for the appellants vehemently argued that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the claimantg' evidence about the income of the deceased and in assessing his income at Rs.600/- per month only; in awarding low compensation of Rs.87,000/- only; and in holding that the Insurance Company was entitled to recover the amount of S^^Sa-x SV.^^E '8'jg :l INS- Rs.54,037/- deposited by the Insurance Company under 'no fault liability' from the claimants. 7) Shri Goutam Khetrapal, learned counsel for respondent No.2 the National Insurance Company Limited, the insurer ofthe Tractoj, on the other hand supported the award and contended that the Tribunal has rightly exonerated the insurer of the Tractor as at the time of theaccident, the Tractor was carrying Baratis in breach of the policy conditions. 8) Shri N.K. Malviya, learned counsel for respondent No.1 Kamleshwar Bhagat @ Kamlesh Bhagat, the owner of the offending vehicle Tractor, on the other hand submitted that the Tribunal has erred in exonerating the InsuranceCompany from its liability to pay compensation to the claimants and in holding that the owner of the Tractor was liable to pay compensation to the claimants. 9) So far as the finding leading to exoneration of the insurer of the Tractor from its liability to pay compensation to the claimants is concerned, it is apparent from para 22 of the evidence of AW1 Mahaveer Prasad, father ofthe deceased that the offending vehicle Tractor at the time of the accident was carrying Baratis. It is not in dispute that the Tractor in question was registered and insured for agricultural purpose alone. The breach of the policy condition, thus, is established. ^ 10) We, therefore, do not find any infirmity in the finding recorded by the Tribunal leading to exoneration of the insurer of the Tractor ;BflP' from its liability to pay compensation to the claimantsand holding the owner of the Tractor liable to pay compensation to the claimants. 11) So far as the quantum of compensation is concerned, it is true that the claimants pleaded that their son Dilip Bhagat used to earn Rs.50/- per day as labour, in his evidence AW1 Mahaveer Prasad, father of the deceased in para 20 categorically admitted that the wages in villages were Rs.40/- per day and his son was not getting work daily. 12) Even assuming that deceased Dilip Bhagat was getting work for 25 days in a month and his wages were Rs.40/- per day, his income would come to Rs.1,000/- per month and Rs.12,000/- per annum; as he was unmarried on the date of the accident, 50% of his income is required to be deducted towards his personal expenses in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Syed Basheer Ahamed and others Versus Mohammed Jameel and another reported in (2009) 2 Supreme Court Cases 225; the daimants' dependency, therefore, would not be more than Rs.6,000/- per annum; as the claimants are parents of the deceased, the appropriate multiplier in the present case would not be more than'10 in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Municipal Corporation of-Greater Bombay Vs. Laxman lyer and another, reported in (2003) 8SCC-731, wherein it was held that in those cases where the claimants are parents of the deceased, the multiplier should never exceed 10; if the annual BSBK !1 ,]:sa|)iSa •ISIBII h-^ dependency of Rs.6,000/- is multiplied with the multiplier of 10, the compensation works out to Rs.60,000/-; by awarding further sum of Rs.5,000/- towards funera.l expenses and Rs.5,000/- for loss of estate, the claimants become entitled to receive a total sum of Rs.70,000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of their son Dilip Bhagat in the motor accident, which is less than the sum of Rs.87,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. 13) We, therefore, do not find any scope for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 14) The Tribunal certainly has erred in holding thatthe insurer was entitled to recover the amount of Rs.54,037/- deposited by the insurer under 'no fault liability' under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act from the claimants. In fact, the Tribunal ought to have directed that the insurer of the offending vehicle Tractor can recover this amount of Rs.54,037/- from the owner of the Tractor. 15) We, therefore, modify that part of the award and the insurer of the Tractor is permitted to recover the amount of Rs.54,037/- from the owner of the Tractor and not from the claimants. 16) With the above modification in the above direction, the appeal stands disposed of. 17) No order as to costs. __ Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge ^ subbu 1