^•' ,,^ ^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR fC.G.V M.A.lC) ^l200Sj ^,., „,., APPELLANTS: CLAIMANTS..^y ^f^"' -\ ^.v ,^T RESPONDENTS : NON-CLAIMANTS 1. 1. Smt. Veemndhatj/Bai W/o late Shambhunath Verma, aged about 30 years, Occupation Housewife 2. Gajendra Verma S/o late Shambhunath Verma, aged about 13 years, Minor 3. Ku. Shashikala D/o late Shambhunafh Verma, aged about 10 years, Minor 4. Ku. Swati D/o late Shambhunath Verma, aged about 08 years, Minor 5. Smt. Jhalo Bai W/o Pardeshi Ram Verma, aged about 50 years 6. Pardeshi Ram Verma S/o late Ramadhin Verma, aged about 55 years Minor appellantNo.2, 3 and 4 through legal guardian mother Smt. Varundhati Bai appellant No. 1. All R/o Prem Nagar, Mowa, Post Shankar Nagar, Thana Mowa, Raipur, Tahsiland District Raipur (C.G.) Versus Jayanti Bhai Patet aged about 20 years Prhashant Timber, TimberMarket, Fafadih, Raipur, Tahsil and District Raipur (C.G.) 2. The Oriental Insurance Private Limited, Divisional Manager, Divisional Office No. 1, Jail Road, Kutchery Chowk, Raipur (C.G.) 3. Hulas alias Holas Verma, S/o Poona Ram Verma, aged about 36 years, R/o Premnagar, Mowa, Raipur, Tahsil and District Raipur (C.G.) Miscellanceous Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1994 X.i-HC—78 ^WWf WW^ -^(^^j.^ w^tw\^, ^iwy .M.^...C.O.....^.P.,...^.S.l/J IQQ^ a;n^?xi^r(^t3^K() <?nt^T ^n t^Nr 'pf^i 'STI^I 's^iN' ¥^BiR'3Rfp[ ^Ut^ %N^N -qwff ^ fe^ ^N<?R '^^^r^?t?r S.B. Hon'bfeShri JusticeN.K.Aaarvlfal 04-11-2009 Shri S.C. Verma, counsel for th^ None for the respondents. Heard on admission. The instant appeal has beej seeking enhancement of compens^tion against the award dated 19-03-2008 passed by First Addij:ional Motor Accident Clajms Tribunal, Raipur (for short 'th^ Tribunal') in claim case No. 10/2007. The facts briefly stated as un<per: fn the intervening night of 12 appellants. ^ preferped by the appeltants h12-2006, deeeased Shambhu |Nath Verma (for short 'the deceaspd') sitting as pillion rider with 'respondent No.1 on the motorcycle was coming from Palari to jlViova Raipur. At about 3.00 P.M. Jh the night when they reached jnear Laxmi Rice Miil, the said motorcycie was dashed by ^>me junknown truck and the deceased succumbed to the injuries sustained in the accident on the sp6t. The appellant preferred an application before the Tribunal under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicjes Act (for short 'the Act') against the owner of the motorcycle and its Insurance Company claimjng Rs.13,SO,€X)0/- as compensation. _- XI-HC—78 ^T RTi'i<^ •^^T^]^l^1W 'NINCTS ^»N|C8% 7^r ^ll^ld^, ^tii<Hji<o, [®i<ni^^< R.wft..cc)-^?--*-s-c'^200^ s^'v^ C^3S^) i^TW^t^^i^T - ^- with inaome Learned Tribunai on a clos^ by the parties, the materia! availafc|l< of the parties awarded a total 4i respondents No.1 and 3 aiong from the date of application, exonet from jts liability. While awarding tj Tribunal has assessed the Rs.36,000/- per annum deductjng expenses applied multiplier of 16 sj| be aged about more than 35 year^ lawarded a total sum of Rs.: jdependency. The learned Tri^ |Rs.2000/- towards funeral expense^, lconsortium and Rs.2,500/- toward [awarded a total sum of Rs.3,93,500^ The only submission made |counsel for the appeilant is that the |and, therefore, the learned Tribunal |of the monthly income towards jdeceased. According to him, if the^ [famjly ofthe deceased are large in| |3f specific evidence in regard to (earned Tribunal should have ^1^(<^41^ HR^f ^ fest if^l^K '^3ffiP:i3^I scrutiny of the evidence led ile on record and submissjons |um of Rs.3,93,500/- against interest @ 6% per annum (•atjng the Insurance Company »ecompensation, the learned of the deceased as 1/3rd towards personal ifice the deceased was held to at the time of accident, thus },84,000/- towards loss of frunal has further awarded ^, Rs. 5000/- towards }oss of ps loss of estate and thus |)y Shri S.C. Verma, iearned claimants are six in number has erred in deducting 1/3rd (^ersonal expenditure of the if the Iriumber of dependents in the Inumber, then in the absence c^ntributjon to the famiiy, the adot)ted the unit metho^ as k F ^&" ^ ^•'A "' ^ I •"si9 &: !i- 7""I./' 'i '•.... ,/ f' XI-HG—78 W»f^n 9hNl<^ 7Sf ^WM^, ^tl1'M<l<o, f61Kni^1< _.__:....rfx..A..SC\....^..:..^..lliL ^T^T TR^ C!I?t3^^) If^TW '^m w^ v I^T^l^t^3?i^T - -^- ^|^41-S 'mH^f ^ fe^ i^lt^K ^^tSW^T^T observed by the Supreme Court irl the case of U.P. State Road Transport Corporation and otffers v. Trilok Chandra and others; reported in (1996) 4 SCC ?62 and should have deducted 1/5thtowards personal expenses otthedeceased. I have heard iearned co<{inse( for fhe appiicant and perused the award impugned. {•ibunal has passed the award pcheduie of the Act. !t is aiso jclaim preferred by the ISection 163-A of the Act. Undisputedly, the learned T strictly in accordance with Second not in dispute that the claimants/appeliants was under Section 163-A begins with non-abs^ntee clause and provides for payment of compensation as jndic^ted in the Second Schedule to the legal representatives to the| case may be. The principies reJating to cj compensation are different for clairrl deceased or injuries as the |eterminatjon of quantum of |s made under Section 163 of the Act. Hon'ble the Supreme Cburt in the case of Onentai Inswance Co.Ltd. v. Meena Vaifyal and othws; reported in (2007) 5 SCC 428 has observed in jthe ciajmants proceed under Se4tion 163-A of the Act, the lcompensation wjl! be awarded in jcaliing upon the victim or his d para 27 of its judgment that jf terms of schedule without ^pendents to establish any jnegligence or default on the part of^he owner ofthe vehtele or 4- ^ ^.\ F XI-HG—78 WN^IT^W^ •3^r ^it^id<Li, ^\i1<r!4i<o, [®icni^^< ,.?SA.A.C.C.)...»Jtt>..-..Ml.lAJ -——-LJ_^_ ^TI^T TR^' ('^3^^) ^T^T^Tf^t^ ^m<3?n^iw^ i^i?^: ^^ W^I •^qf^f^ T[jT|^ff -^ f^^ <Fsi-^|< ^ 3if^H^T^T "<, v the driver of the vehicle. In view ofl the learned Tribunal has erred irt accordance with Second Schedule For the foregoing reasons, enhancement of compensation awc appeal filed by the appeliants for ei| is, therefore, liable to be and is h< admissionstage.. above, it cannot be said that awardjng compensation in »ftheAct. do not find any scope for rded by the Tribunal and the ihancement of compensation •eby dismissed summarily at Sd/- N.K. Agrawal Judge