\”\ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON’BLE $HRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON’BLE sHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, .J. Misc. Appeal No. 1243 ofr2oo4 Anant Kumar Nair, s/o. Shri Govind Nair, aged about 54 years. ' Ku. Padmini Nair, d/o.‘ Anant Kumar Nair, aged about 22 years; Smt. Laxmi Nair, w/o. Late Govind Nair, aged about 68 years. Aliare r/o. near Krishi Upaj Mandi, Padavpara Kota, Teh. Kota, Distt. Biiaspur (CG). VERSUS Resgondents Pradip Kumar Rai, SID. N.L. Rai (Driver), r/o.' village Gadasarai, Dindori, Distt. Dindori (MP). 2 Mukesh Kumar Sahu slo. S.K. Sahu (vehicle owner) r/o. village & P.O. Pendra Road, Teh. Gaurela, Distt Bilaspur (CG). 3 Branch Manager, The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Branch at ‘ Dayalband, Bilaspur, CG. Through Divisional Office, Opposite C.G. High Court, Bilaspur, CG. a Miscellaneous Appeal uls 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, .1988 . @@ Present : Shri D.C. Verma, counsel for the appeuants. None for respondents No.1 and 2 though sewed. Shri Avinash Mishra, counsel for respondent No.3. ORDER (07* December, 2010) The following order of the Coun was passed by Rajeev Gupta, c.J. This is claimants’ appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur (for short 'the Tribunat’) vide award dated ’ 104.09.2004,vpassed in Claim Case No. 17/2004. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.14,45,000/- claimed by the ‘~appei|antslciaimants, unfortunate father, sister and grandmother of deceased Rajesh Kumar, hy tiling a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 29.07.2003, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1 ,84,000I- as compensation along with interest Q 6% per annum‘from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 3) The Tribune! on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence ted before it heid that deceased Rajesh Kumar died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 29.07.2003; the accident occurred due to rash and negiigent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Truck bearing registration No.C.G.-1D-ZB/978; as the above offending-vehicle ”mews?” x X\ Tmck-on the date of the accident was insured with the Orientai Insurance Company Limited and the Insurance. Company couid not estabiish any breach of the policy conditions, the Insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimants. 4) As the respondents have not tiled any appeal against the award, the above findings recorded by the Tribunal have now l attained finality. 5) The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- per annum. By deducting 1/3" of Rs.15,000l- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants’ dependency was assessed at Rs.10,000l- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.10,000/—'with the multiplier of 18, the compensation was worked out to Rs.1 ,80,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.4,000/- under other heads, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,84,000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death ofdeceased Rajesh Kumar in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed v payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.1,84,0001— @ 6% per annum from'the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. .6) Shri D.C. Verma, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal has erred In not accepting the claimants' evidence about the Income of the deceased and in assessing his income at Rs.15,000l- perannum only; in not ./v 'mst’ . awarding any sum towards funeral expenses and loss of estate; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.1 ,84,000I- only. 7) Shri Avinash Mishra, leamed counsel for respondent No.3 the Oriental Insurance Company Limited, on the other hand, - supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.1,84,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 8) ln a motor accident claim case, what is important is that, the compensation to be awarded by the Courts/Tribunals should be just and proper compensationin the facts and circumstances of the case. lt should neither be a meager amount of e compensation, nora Bonanza. 9)‘ Now, we shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.1,84,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 10) True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Rajesh Kumar used to earn Rs.3,000/— per month by working in a private concem — Kerala Tyre Company, Champa, the evidence led in that behalf was discrepant and unreliable. AW-1 Padmini Nair deposed that her brother Rajesh Kumar was gettingsaiary of Rs.3,000l- per month, whereas the claimants' other witness AW-2 M.S.Nair stated that he was paying Rs.4,150/— per month as salary .to the deceased. in this state of highly discrepant ~ evidence, we do not find any faultinthe approach of the Tribunal in discarding the claimants’ evidence about the income of the deceased and in assessing his income on the basis of the notional income prescribed in the Second Schedule under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act. 11) The Tribunal has been quite iiberal in deducting only 1/3'“_ of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses though the deduction in that behalf could have been to the extent of 50% of the income of the deceased in view of the fact that deceased Rajesh Kumar, on the date ofethe accident, was unmarriedand after his marriage his contribution to the father and sister would have been reduced substantially and 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. 12) Nevertheless, the Tribunal has certainly erred in not awarding any sum towards funerai expenses and loss of estate. 13) ln our opinion, the claimants are entitled to receiver - Rs.5,000/~ towards funeral expenses and Rs.5,000/— for loss of estate. 14) The claimants are further awarded a quantitied amount of interest of Rs.1,000/- on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.10,000I-. » 15) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants! claimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The claimants are awarded further sum of Rs.11,000!- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced § _ A amount of compensation in addition to the sum of Rs.1,84,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. 16) Respondent No.3 The Oriental Insurance Company Limited is granted three months’ time for depositing the total sum of > Rs.1 1 ,000/- before the conceming Claims Tribunal. 17) No order as to costs. sw- i Chief Justice 1 subbu i “$6