? H!G}'§ SQURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DlViSlON BENCH w GQRAM: HON’ELE $HRI RAJEEV GUPTR CJ. HQN’LE $HR§ SUNIL KHMAR SINHA, J. Misc. Appeai No. 93 of 2&03 4‘f\{. Misc, Agaea! undef Section §?3 of the Motor Vehicle Am Present: Shri Awadh Tripathi and Shri Wasim Miya, learned counsel for the appellants. None for respondent No.1 though served. Shrl Shree Kumar Agrawal, learned Senior Counsel with Shrl Anand Gupta, learned counsel for respondent No.2. m o a o E R ream April, 2019} The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J, l g; Agpeiiants mmmants ‘ 1. Shanti Devi wife of sate Madam Kumar, aged abcrui 55 years, occupatior; Househoid. ‘ 2. Dhananjay, son e§ Chandrashekhar Pansari, aged about 5 years. (Minor) ihrough naturai guardian grandmother - Shanti Devi, appe!!ant no.1. BGih are residents of Gujrati Colony, Dhamtafi; d§strict Dhamtari (CG) Versus ‘Resnendents 1 Arguni Chawal Udyog, Proprietor Ganpat ‘Ncn-c!aimants Lal Agrawal, son of Ramsingh Dayai aged about 48 years, resident of Baniyapara, Dhamtari, District Dhamtari (C.G.) 2 The New india lnsuranEe Co. Ltd. Thakkar Bhawan, GAE. Road, Bhilai, district Durg (CG) )ix ® This is claimants’ appeal for enhancement of ‘the Compensation awarded by the Additional Motor Accident Ctaims Tribunal, Dhamtarl (fat short, ‘the Tribunal’) vide award dated 24,12.2002,paseed in Claim Case No.2t§/2002. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.i8,40,000/— claimed by the appellants/ claimants; unfortunate widow and grandson of depeased Madam Kumar by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 18042001 ,‘the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1 30,0001— as compensation along with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition titl the date of actual payment.’ 3) The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it heid that deceased Madan Kumar died on account of injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 18.04.2001; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Car bearing registration NoMP 23 L l9741, in which the deceased was travelling; as the said Car, on the date of the accident, was insured with the New india lnsurance Company Limited, the Insurance Company was liabte to pay compensation to the claimants. 4) As the respondents have not filed any appeal against the award, the above findings recorded by the Tribunal have now attained finality. 5) The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.5,000/— per month and Rs.60,0001— per annum. By deducting Rs.3,0001— per month towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants’ dapendency was assessed at Rs.2,0001— p€r month and Rs.24,000i— per annum. By mult§plying the annua! dependency of Rs.24,0{30/- with the muitipiier of 5; the compensation was worked out to Rs.1,20,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.10,DGG/— under other heads; the Tribunal awarded a rota! sum of Re.1,30,000!- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Madan Kumari in the motor accident. The Tribuna! further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rst ,30,000/- @ 7.5% per annum from the date of fiiing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri Awadh Tripathi and Shri Wasim Miya, learned counset for the appellants submitted that, the Tribunal has erred in deducting more than 50% of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses; and in awarding low compensation of R31 ,30,000/— only. 7) Shri Shreekumar Agrawal; teamed Senior counsel with Shri Anand Gupta, learned counsel for respondent No.2 the New india Insurance Company Limited, on the other hand supported the award and contended that, as deceased Madan Kumar was aged about 60 years on the date of the accident, the compensation of ‘Rsi1i3Q,OOO/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 8) As the claimants themseives pieaded that. deceased Madan Kumar used to earn Rs.5,000!— per month from money fr R ,‘t . \ ;\ k "A 4 !ending and the income tax return of the deceased, copy whereof was produced before the Tribunal by the ciaimante themselves was aiso to the effect that the deceased was having annual income of Rs.60,000/-, we do not find any infirmity in the assessment of the income of the deceased by the Tribunai at Rs.60,0001— per annum. 9) x ‘The Tribunai certainly has fallen into error in deducting more than 50% of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses. As there were onty two members dependent onlthe income of the deceased i.e. the deceased himself: and his widow claimant No.1 Shanti Devi, deduction to the extent of 50% of the income of the deceased would be appropriate in the present case. We; therefore, assess the claimants’ dependency at Rsi2,500/— per month and Rs.30,000/— per annum by deducting 50% of Rsi60,000/- per annum. 10) Considering that, deceased Madan Kumar was aged about 60 years on the date of the accident, the multiptier of 5 selected by the Tribunal is appropriate. 11) By multiptying the annual dependency of Rs.30,000i— with the muitiptier of 5, the compensation works out to Rs.‘l ,50,000/-. The claimants are further entitled to receive Rs.5,000/— towards funeral expenses; Rs.5,‘OQQI- for loss of estate; and, Rs.5,000/- for loss of consortium to the widow. The claimants, thus, become entitied to receive total sum of Rst ,65,000/— as compensation for the deathw tVladan Kumar in the motor accident. l ii; 12) Learned counse! for the parties submitted that with a View t0 avoid any possible dispute between the parties a‘bout the period for which the ciaimants are entitled to receive interest on the enhanced amount of compensation, the amount of interest on ‘ the enhanced amount of compensation may be quantified in this I appeal itself. J3) Considering ail the relevant factors including the delay int disposal of the claim petition and the present appeal and the fact that insurance Company alone is not to be blamed for the entire delay in the matter, we quantity the amount of interest on the ‘ enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.35,000/— at Rs.5,000I-. i4) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellantsi claimants for enhancement of the compensation is aliowed in part. The compensation of Rs.1,30,000/- awarded by ‘ the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.1 ,65,000/- with further quantified ‘ amount of interest of Rs.5,000/— on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.35,000/—. a t5) Respondent No.2 The New lndia lnsurance Company Limited is granted three months’ time for depositing the total sum of Rs.40,GGD/— (Rs.35,000/— towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.5,000!— towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.35,000/—) before the concerning Ciaims Tribunal. 16) No order as to costs. Sd/— CHIEF JUSTICE