{m^^3f- »m HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE CHHMTISGARH : BILASPUR (DIVISION BENGHl CORAM : Hon'ble Shri S.R. Nayak, CJ Hon'bleShri D.R. Desftmukh, J. Misc. Appeal No. 1116 OF 2005 !^-, APPELLANTS CLAIMANTS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Sahodra Bai, Wd/o. Bedu Ram aged abouf38 years, Fattelal, S/o Beduram Sahu, Aged about20years Ku. Macturl, D/o Becturam Sahu, aged about18years. Ku. Pushpa, D/o Beduram Sahu, Aged about14yrs. Thanwirin, W/o Pusau RamSahu Agedabout 60 yrs., Appellants No. 4 represented by tegal guardian mother appellant no. 1, all are R/p village- Bansankara, District Raipur (C.G.) P.A- Village-F^rasada, P.S.-Neora, Tahsil - Tilda, District-Raipur(CG) Versus N®iBiUiSgWS: ••>., .-^. 'l- & 3. ^jay fiFajaRati, S/o^Bharat Prs(japati G/o Dalji^^ngb^ S/o Dalbjr Smgh^ R/o 1^i2)i[,WaclaniK(|a|'i8f,|dabalRur,Tahsll &;@i| ic;t-ysiBalpur(IU||3) Sa[||u%Elaljifc|Sjingh, Ste 1-akhbir Singh, R/o 1^2/A, Madan Mahal, Jabalpur, Tabsjr& [3istt.^abalpyn(MP) The Orieritel Insurance Cb. Ltd., Through-Diytsional Manager, Division No. 1, Jail Road, Raipur, Raipur (CG) 9v Rresent: JMr;Sa6shChandraVerma,leamedcounaelfbrthe appelliartts. | Mr. Ali A^ar, learned counsel for respondent No.3. ORAI.ORDER (Passedon4"lofJariuary2008) -• ' .' : " Thefollowing Order ofthe Court was ^isSed by S.R.Nayak,W: SSS&S^SK^%^^^f: -'?- /'I.1, M In a death case,the dependents of the deceased not being satisfiedwiththecompensationawardedbythe MACThave preferredthis appeal for more compensation. Itwas CQntended by leamed counsel for theappellantsthatthedeceaSedwasamasonandhewaseamlngdaily income of Rs.150/- and thereftire, the MACT is notjustified in teking his income at notional rate of Rs. 15000/- per annum. It wasatso ContBnded thatwhat is awarded bythe MACT Under the conventional heads.suchas loss of consortium, loss of estate are very much on lower side. (2) We do not findany merit inthefirst contention. Though, it was claimed that the deceased was a mason and was earning Rs.150/- per day, that claim was not proved by any legal evidence. However, we find force In the second contention asthis Court oflsn held and reiterated that even compensation to be awarded ynder the convenUonal heads should reflect the time and place of aecklent and also the present money value. Looking from| that angte, wh^ awarded under the conventional :-? i '•• .' ; .: . ;:,, : ": . ' headfris on lowersjde. TOerefc^, ^ widow of the deceased towarcls loss of consortium and Rs. 25,000/- towards loss of estate. The impugned order shall stand modified in the above terms. In all other respects, the impugned award shaltstand unattered. The partiesshall beartheir respective costs In thls appeal. (3) Theappealisallowedtbtheextentindicateldabove. /•' /^ //,i S<1A Chief Jusdce Sd/- Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh. Judge / •~s^<,