HIGH C3URT GF CHHATTESGARH : BiiASPUR Bivisica 3ém’h: Hatfiaie 3m 3umi Kumar smha! a 9n’b%e Sha'i M alra AM“ Qhi‘ H a.“ . M fa liuil a ‘ MRNOJ 2d2f236‘é ;WPELLAf\ITS Kuiwantin Bai. Wido. of iate Pusauram DeQa’iigan, Aged about 53 yams. GLAIMANTS Mangalurami Sig. late Pusauram Dewangan, Age-:5 abcutu38 years Ramkhiiawar‘. Sio. iaie i'-”‘usaus'am Dewangam, Aged abeut 35 years Ashok Kumar Dewangan, Sio. iaie Pusauram, Aged about 34 years. Sankr-am Egwangan, S’s. Pusaui'am Dewangan, NE are Rle. vi!!age Ghhimavan: Pcst-lLp, RS. Piihaura, District-Mahasamund (CE) hJaw CH Versus Sai‘ltosh Kumar! Sic. Suremira Chaube, Aged abeut 2Q yaars, RloNoJ Rajabagan, Kaikata ~35, RS. Bagnagaf, Disirict—24 Pargana, Ko!kata {West Berigw) Bh-agwarl Das Vyapéri, Sic. Ramamm, Aged about 50 years, R/a. M/sBhagwan Vyapar Udyog Lim§tecL ”£4 Mukarji Road, Keikata —- 700 26 (West Bengai) T; e New india inswame Cm‘rzpany Limited iviadona Buiiding. Rairmr (C.G.) RESFGNDENTS MON—APPLICANT '2 v fvii$CELLiifii $33 i‘iPFEf-‘L Ui€§ERISE$TION 173 6F iVi$"i‘$R VEHI3LE i63j§38 Preseni: - Shii Sharmesh Shiivasiava, cauns-éi for the apiaeiiams. Shri Shivendu Pandya, counsel fer respandent No.3. .J- $§§ER (?a5$éci or: 2??“ November, 2i}? ii) . ~ - Foiiowiiig order of {he Coufl was pa$sed by 3uiiii Kumar Sin‘na, J. The appeiiants i' ciaimants have fiied this appeai for erui’i‘ancement of dcmpensafion: awarded in Claim case No.44/‘Q3 by fhe 2“ Additional Motor Iv VII a éa", $$n ) Q §J \9\ Accideni Ciaims Tribur‘ai, Disirict—Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh vicie award daiEd 171‘681’2304. The appeiiants/ciaimants, unfon‘unate widow and sons of deceased- Pusauram fiied a Ciaim petition under Section 166 of the ivioior Vehicie Act. ciaiming'compensaiion of Rs.4,25.6(30f- for his death in the motor accident, which took place on 5i3i'2003 wheh the deceased was daehed by the truck bearing Registration No.‘v’\i.B.23iA/2?35 on account of rash and negiigenidriving of the said truck by Its driver. 2. The appeiiants pieaded thai the deceased was earning Rs.iGGi- per day and Rs.3,UO'G per month by working as a skiiied iabourer in a hotei. The Tribunai heid ihai the deceased was earning Rs.4Gi- to Rs.56i'— per day and Rsi i35Gi— per month by working as a ia‘oourer in the hotei. By deducting about ii‘3 towards the personai expenses of the deceased, the dependency of the appeiiants was worked out to Rs.§,GG/‘- per month and Rs.tG,6QG/’- per annum. By appiying rnuitipiier of 5 to Rs.iG!6OG/-, the compensation was worked o.t to Rs.54,GGGI-. By adding further sum of Rs.9.5001’- under other heads, the totai amount of compensation was worked out to Rs.o3,5Bu/- a a which the Tribunai awarded as compensation to the appeiiants for the death of the deceased- Pusauram in the motor accident. The Tribunal aiso awarded interest (if), % per annum from the date of fiiing the ciaim petition tiii reaiization. 'Mr. Bharmesh Shrivastava§ iearned counsei for the appeiiants, argued that the income was not property assessed by the Tri‘ounai r‘and the Tribunai aiso erred in setecting tower muttipiier of 5. Gn the other hand. Shri Shivendu Pandy‘a, teamed counsei for respondent No.3-The New india insurance Company‘Ltd. opposed these arguments and suppoded the award passed by the Tribunai. OJ U'I We have hearci ieamed counsei f‘i’ the partieS ai ‘e‘ngth arid aiso perused ihe recorcis of thé ciaim ca$e. The ciaimants pieadeu‘ that ihe deceased was earning RsmGi- per day by working as a labourer ih a hotei. To support their above contention, ihey have examined the owner of ine hotei narneiy— ‘fashwant' Sihgh (AW2}. Yashwanr Singh depoeed that ihe deceased was working in his hotei as a iahourer and he wae paying him RsJGGi- per day‘ in the cross-examination, he acirnitied ihai there were nine iabourers in his hotei and he wae paying them Re.40i— to R's.50/- per Gav. it is on tnie orai evidence of Yashwant S‘ingh (AW2), the Tribunai heid that the n‘eceased must he getting Rs.4G/- to Rs.50/— per dav oy working in the hotei of Yashwant Singh (AWZtand his income was thus assessed to Rsi ,35Cii- per month. The case of the appeiiants was that the deceased was a skiiied ia‘oourer and he was engaged in the hotei of Yashwant $ingh for preparation of sweets. The Tribunai ought to have considered that the admission of Yashwant Singh (AWa; that he was paying Rs.46i— to Rs.5G/'— per day to the iabourers was intact in reiation to the simpie workers of the hotei and that admission ought not have been appiied tor'assessing income of the deceased because the said admission was not oan‘icuiariy in reiation tr the deceased. Therefore, we do not approve the finding or‘ the Tribunai regarding income oi : i.the deceased. .1 nx; As there is oniy orai evidence regarding income of the deceased, therefore we deem it appropriate’to hoid that since the deceased was a skiiied ia'oourer, therefore, in normai-circumstahces, he must be earning Rs.2‘,GOGI- per month and Rs.'24,t'100i- per annurn in the vear 2003. We therefore propose to re-oornpute the compensation by hpidtng the income of the deceased as Rs.'2£i;0ti0i;e per annum. ‘ g‘ta q» 3 . 6. 8 uCunu' ‘15 ‘owardS ihe personai expenses of the deceased “o the abcve annuai income of Rs.24§GGI-, the depeiidency comes to Re.‘l6,0GG/-. The eeceasea‘ was aged aboui 63' years ai‘ld his widow was aged about 53 years. Looking io ihe above circumstances, we deem it appropriate i0 appiy mui‘tipiier of T in ihis matter which was heio‘ to be a proper ’muitipiier in case of the deceased aged between 6t to 65 years in the matter of Saria rt Cor oration an B‘y‘ appiying multipiier of 7 to the annuai depenency f Rs.t6!0GGI-: the compensation works out to 1‘ 66/ By addin furth sum of Rem 060:2 under other ead the amou of compensation works Out to 1,2266. The Tri‘ounai has airea' awaroeo ns.63,bGw-. dy, cting R - m t OGI- the baiance comes to R Th appeii a thus ieo to receive Rs o5 5301- s e nced amot of ompensao foQe death 0i decease — ram n e mr c toOK piace on o/3/2u0a rosau i th om acment wnICn To avoid further compiications ad iooking to the deia‘y caused in disposa of the ciaim petition as aiso the ciaimants appeai and that the insurance Cmpany atone cannot be biameo‘ for such deiay‘, we deem it appropriate to quantify the interest, which we quantify as Rs.4,— n this matte 10. Therefore the appeitants are thus entitied to receive the totai sum of Rs 6.5 GOOI- (Rs 58 560,- as t e enhanceo amount or compensation + Rs.4ouO/- as the amount of quantified interest on the ennanceo amount of compensation) which they shaii receive from the insurance Company. _, The respondent No.3- The New tndia insurance Company Ltd. is granted three months time to deposit the above amcunt before the conceme ‘ “‘a Tnounai; o R % oy ‘u s 63 bGw uo Rs 2G s 58 506/— e ants re entit a th en a uii ctin ;- . and others vs. §eihi Trans o d another, (zws) S C C 1 d o ‘ 2 02 g er rmissioie hs totai nt n i o 50“f i r nk The appeai is aiiowea’ to the exieni mdicated above. There shaii be no wrcier as to cost(s). x ’ sw- {fManindra Mohan Shrivastava 1' ' Judge / Sd/— ( f5 Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge ‘ k. R / 9