HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BSLASPUR DIVISiON BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J ADpellants Claimants Misc. Appeai (C) No.834 of 2008 1. Savitri 'Bai, age - 42 years, widow of late Shreedhar Bariha 2. Bijali Bai, age 22 years, D/o late Shreedhar Bariha By Caste - Binjhawar, Bothe appeliants are the r/o Bagardarha, PS Basna, Tahsil - Basna, Distt Mahasamund (CG) VERSUS Respondents 1. Nazir Khan, age 35 years, S/o Nasir Non-applicants Khan, R/o Vitlage - Lakhagarh, PS Pithora, Tahsil & Distt Mahasamund (CG) (Driver of Mini Bus No.CG-04 E/0779) 2. Jeet Singh Bagga, S/o Tritok Singh Bagga, R/o Avanti Vihar Colony, Raipur District - Raipur (CG) (Owner of Mini Bus No.CG-04 E/0779) 3. The New tndia Insurance Company Llmited, through the Divisionai Office at Madina Building, Jail Road, Raipur, Distt Raipur (CG) (Insurance Company of Minl Bus No.CG-04 E/0779) • IViiscelSaneous Appea! under Sectlon 173 of IVIotor Vehicies Act Present : Shri JA Lohani, counsel for the appellants. Shri Shivendu Pandya, counsel for respondent No.3. ORDER (16th June, 2011) ' The foitowing order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. ,^T ^^. ^ ^ This is ciaimants' appeai for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Ciaims Tribunal, Mahasamund (for short 'the Tribuna!') vide award dated 07.12.2007, passed in Claim Case No.31/2007. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.14,00,000/-, claimed by the appellants/claimants, unfortunate widow and daughter of deceased Shreedhar Bariha, by fiiing a claim petitlon under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor acddent on 10.03.2007, the Tribunal awarded a total sum pf Rs.2,92,000/- as compensation aiong with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actua! payment. 3) The Tribunal on a ciose scrutiny of the entire evidence !ed before it held that deceased Shreedhar Bariha died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 10.03.2007; the acddent occurred due to rash and negligent driving ofthe driver of the offending vehicle Mini Bus bearing registration No.CG-04E/0779; as the above offending vehicie Mini Bus on the date of the accident, was insured with the New Indla Insurance Company Limited, and the Insurance Company could not estabiish any breach of the policy conditions, the insurance Company was llabie 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 finatity. /t ^ ^........ ^^ ^ ^<^' ^^, -^: 5) The Tribunai assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.100/- per day; Rs.3,000/- per month; and Rs.36,000/- per annum. By deducting 1/3rd of Rs.36,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.24,000/- per annum. By multipiying the annual dependency of Rs.24,000/- with the multiplier of 12, the compensation was worked out to Rs.2,88,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.2,000 towards funera! expenses and Rs.2,0007- for ioss of consortium to the widow, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.2,92,000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Shreedhar Bariha in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compsnsation of Rs.2,92,000/- @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition tili the date of actual payment. 6) Shri JA Lohanl, learned counse! forthe appellants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased; in selecting the lower muitiplier of 12; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.2,92,000/" oniy. 7) Shri Shivendu Pandya, learned counsel for respondent No.3, the New india Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicte Mini Bus on the other hand supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.2,92,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and cjrcumstances of the present case. 8) True, the ciaimants pleaded that deceased Shreedhar Bariha used to earn Rs.150/- per day as Mason, no cogent and reliabie ,,.^^&^:.,<.,, \ ^"r"'-''-^ ^/^' ^ M tM?^ j ^g^-'ii a .^ ^ .^' evidence was led before the Tribunai the estabiish the income of the deceased to that extent. In this state of evidence, we do not flnd any infirmity in the assessment of the income of the deceased by the Tribunal at Rs.100/- per day; Rs.3,000/- per month; and Rs.36,000/- per annum. 9) The claimants' dependency also has been rightly assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.24,000/- per annum by deducting the usual 1/3rd of the income of Rs.36,000/- towards the personai expenses ofthedeceasd. 10) Nevertheless, the muitiplier of 12 seiected by the Tribunal is on the iower side and requires reconsideration. 11) Deceased Shreedhar Bariha was shown to be 50 years of age in his postmortem report. Inour opinion, the multipiier of 13 would be appropriate in the present case in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt) and others Versus Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported in (2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases 121, wherein muitipiier of 13 has been prescribed for the age group between 46-50 years. 12) By multipiying the annua! dependency of Rs.24,000/- with the m'uStipjier of 13, the compensation works out to Rs.3,12,000/-. The c!aimants are further entitled to receive Rs.5,000/- for funerai expenses; Rs.5,000/- for loss of estate and Rs.5,000/- for loss of consortium to the widow. The claimants, thus, become entitied to receive a total sum of Rs.3,27,000/- as compensatlon for the death of deceased Shreedhar Bariha in the motor accident. 13) Learned counsel for the submitted that with a view to .//ys'^^ yy' .^^. "'^ '%..3£'?"' -?<^ avoid any possible dispute between the parties about the period for vvhich the claimants are entitled to recelve interest on the enhanced amount of cornpensatlon, the arnount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation may be quantified in this appeal itseif. 14) Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter including the deiay in disposai of the claim petition and the present appeai and the fact that the Insurance Company aione is not to be blamed for the entire delay in the matter, we quantify the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.35,000/- at Rs.5,000/-. 15) For the foregoing reasons, the appea! fiied by the appeilants/ daimants for enhancement of the compensation is aliowed in part. The compensation of Rs.2,92,000/- awarded by the Tribunai is enhanced to Rs.3,27,000/- with further quantified amount of interest of Rs.5,000/- on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.35,000/-. 16) Respondent No.3 the New India Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.40,000/- (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 Ctaims Tribunal. 17) No order as to costs. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge