A % k & .iN EHE i’ilGE‘E GQHRT OF CHEIAET§E§GAR Mm 612 xvsm —/ '5 L ? m mw " 3r” KN Umied Exiia kts‘amzg Caira, ‘ RESFWE‘JDENF ‘ ' £' 1. g . arm §mm ivémiiange, Ci‘aimmm:Appik‘mtthNa.1 ‘wdfc: Late, Badhrarn Mahilange, Aged abnui' 33 emE, mPQNDENT - R‘ 2g ' K11. Yttgiia MahjElange, Clhinmma-A§§)}ica1xt;.N0‘2 'Df‘b Late 'Bodhrallt Mahilartge .Aged abeut 2 Mk yeam, Tm‘ough natural gumdian 5m. Janina Mahilau, EQhh R/c: Godu‘pam, {Emi Marieadmgarh Korea (CG) FEPONDENT : iE'éfeniia Na} gi" VM ~ 3. ‘ 5mm, Sfc: Eammhm1 Panika, Aggd a‘mui éam RXQ Gcdripara, i, Marnemlr‘agar}; Korea, - Law — F£§PONDENI é. é! Narm$a§ee£ Singh, Eéfendt. N02 8,2’0 Dkeu3m§eet Singh P1m§abi, E zc & ge /U ”jag; R/a VVarii Nis, 16,. Near lm gigaxi , ‘ '-v" .‘ Manamdragarh Kama. —C}wner— i l ‘ ‘ ‘ i H AT EILE§PUR Ej AmMkaptu”, éugua, ‘wa'ough its Diwgimmi Qic ge‘ y & ge im R HH IG COURT OF CHHATISGARH T AT BILASPUR ’ ’ Srl Aditya K counsel or esponnts No and 2. None for her respondents. a (Psd o 26th April, 201 1 Per LM. Qdusi J.: Heard. . is apeal has been preferred b th United India insurance opany gaist t award dated 8-5—2 a b the ditiona otor Accidnts Claim Tribuna Manenragarh i Clim ase No.‘38/2000 insofar the impugne award relate to ntum ar only. -————L_ _ Case ofe laias, a tat he claim petition, s tht on e date of accident, i.e., 15-0, at about 6:0 P.M., deceas [odram Mahiia as cmng back from Pod to Gopaa on D.B.: Honbleshri Justice l.M. Quddusi and " Honble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Miscellaneous Aggeai No.622 of 2002 i' h'r Aj M p f‘h hare, f rde .1 ot Si ay ishra, counsel for the apellant, l l ‘ Miscellaneous Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act ORAL ORDER i ase n ) f ud 2 Th p y e Cm an he 200 pssed y Adl M e s l, d n a C as d s qua pt 3 th cmnt s sed in t i a th 5-200 3 ed Bih nge w oi i darir i i ’ Aggellant United india Insurance Company versus :i Resgondents Smt. Jamna Mahilange and others i Present: 2 a s Scoor bearin gitration No.MP 27 C 5481. One Vepa te g res Shamlal Sahu was sitting behind the deceased on the scooter. On y‘ t lvay, a truck bearing estratn No.MP 27 6360, being driven by n—lamant No.1 Sonu rashiy and negiigently, dashed the s’cooter onci nea Kaladi Temple. A a resuit of the accident, the deceased fell r ib s don and sustained grievous injuries on his person. Due to the injuies, the dceased scumbed to death in Regionai Hospitai, i Kur’asiya. The claimants, i.e., wife and daughter of the deceased prerred an pplicatio under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act 988 (henceforth ‘the 'At’) claiming compensation of i 1 c Rs.0,,0/-. ‘ 4. The Claim Tribunal awed compensation of Rs.6,55,000/— s ard in vr of the laimant stning liability to satisfy the award on thenon—claimts jontly or severally. ‘an i l 5. Since the ppellt/insurance company has failed to show reise permissio under Section 170 of the Act, this Court cannot quit n cosir the question of quatum. However, there is mistake in nde n calultio of compenstion by the Claims Tribunal. The Claims can a riunal has assessed noe the deceased as Rs.4,800/— per mth nd deducted 1/3“ owards personal and living expenses of on a t the deceased. Afte deducig 1/3’d from Rs.4,800/-, remainder f r tn in m R reainder as s.3,600/—. i l cefes to Rs.3,200/—, but the Claims Tribunal has observed 6 erefore, we ar of the opinion that the matter requires f Th e con e of t reonsiderati at th end the Claims Tribunal with respect to l £\1\ cre calculation of th aout f compensation. fl WN~ ot‘ct e mn o ‘ t l i t l l l he i rgiio Wi r e uc J fe an ;I32050 fiaou cs fae i aan Tb icm of ‘ 7. Accordingly, we allow the miscellaneous appeal in part. The a findings arrived at by the Claims Tribunal, except the amount of l ‘, compensation, are upheld. However, since the calculation regarding 3 compensation is wrong, the compensation shall be re-assessed as observed above and, therefore, the impugned award is set aside in respect of amount of compensation only. While calculating the Sarla Verma (Smt) and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation ‘4‘ and another, (2009) 6 SCC 121 shall be followed by the Claims Tribunal. The matter is remitted back to the Claims Tribunal for a i decision afresh. Record of the Claims Tribunal be sent back. The i parties shall appear before the Claims Tribunal on 11’“ May, 2011. 1 There shall be no order as to costs. l l l l l l compensation, the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in l i l l ”/T "i Sd/- Kumar Mishra Sd/— , \l w E I aShan udge ,, ., ,. , I.M. QUDDUSI Judge J W