s HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J Misc Appeal (Cl No.961 of 2009 Appellants Claimants ^ Respondents Non-claimants 1 Ku Monika Thakur, D/o Late Jeevan Lal Thakur, aged about 12 years 2 Gopal Thakur, S/o Late Jeevan Lal Thakur, aged about 14 years 3 Smt Neera Bai Thakur, W/o Late Jeevan Lal Thakur, aged about 33 years, occupation House wife (Appellant Nos 1 & 2 being minor on behalf of through their legal guardian mother appellant No.3 Smt Neera Bai Thakur) All R/o Village Bundeli, Post Bundeli, Police Station Pithoura, Tahsil & District Mahasamund (CG) VERSUS Kamal Ratre, S/o Bhuwneshwar Ratre, aged about 26 years, Occupation vehicle Tractor Driver, R/o Village Nayaparakhurd, Police Sttion Pithoura, Tahsil Pithoura, District ~ Mahasamund (CG) (Driver of vehicle Tractor bearing registration No.CG 04/DA 3930) Vivek Kumar Dixit, S/o Ramashankar Dixit, aged about 45 years, Occupation Owner of vehicle Tractor R/o Pithoura, Police Station, Tahsil Pithoura (CG) (Registered owner of vehicle Tractor bearing registration No.CG 04/DA 3930) The Reliance General Insurance Company Limited, through Brnch /&' " 1 t ^es% | ^,- Manager, Branch Office, Shop No.412, 413, 4th Floor, Ravi Bhawan, Near the Jai Sthambh Chowk, Raipur, District Raipur (CG) (Insurer of vehicle Tractor bearing registration No.CG 04/DA 3930) Miscellaneous Appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act Present : Shri Shivendu Pandya, counsel for the appellants. Shri SS Rajput, counsel for respondent No.3. ORDER (15th July, 2011) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, CJ. This is claimants' appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mahasamund (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 02.07.2008, passed in Claim Case No.169/2007. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.13,00,000/-, claimed by the appellants/claimants, unfortunate widow and minor children of deceased Jeevan Lal Thakur by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 23.10.2007, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.2,92,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing ofthe daim petition till the date ofactual payment. 3) The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held that deceased Jeevan Lal Thakur died on account of ^2) ! > ^ l^ the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 25.10.2007; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Tractor bearing registration No.CG-04/DA 3930; as the above offending vehicle Tractor on the date of the accident was insured with the Reliance General Insurance Company Limited, and the Insurance Company could not establish any breach of the policy conditions, the Insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimants. 4) As the respondents have not filed any appeal against the award, the above flnding recorded by the Tribunal has now attained finality. 5) The Tribunal assessed the jncome of the deceased at Rs.100/- per day and Rs.3.000/- per month. By deducting 1/3rd of Rs.3,000/- towards personal expenses of the deceased, the claimant's dependency was assessed at RS.2,000/- per month and Rs.24,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.24,000/- with the multiplier of 12, the compensation works out to Rs.2,88,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.2,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.2,000/- for loss of consortium to the widow, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.2,92,000/- as compensation to the claimant for the death of deceased Jeevan Lal Thakur in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.2,92,000/- @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri Shivendu Pandya, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that though the Tribunal has rightly assessed the jncome of the deceased and the claimants' dependency, the multiplier of 12 selected by the Tribunal is on the lower side. 7) Shri SS Rajput, learned counsel for respondent No.3 the Reliance General Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Tractor on the other hand contended that the compensation of Rs.2,92,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 8) Though learned counsel for the appellants has not challenged the assessment of the income of the deceased at Rs.100/- per day and Rs.3,000/- per month by the Tribunal and the claimants' dependency at Rs.2,000/- per month and Rs.24,000/- per annum, we have stitl examined the material available in the records about the income of the deceased and we are satisfied that the Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.3,000/- per month and the claimants' dependency was assessedat Rs.2,000/- per month and Rs.24,000/- per annum. 9) Nevertheless, the multiplier of 12 selected by the Tribunal is certainly on thelower side. Considering that deceased Jeevan Lal Thakur was shown to be 35 years of age in his postmortem report, we are of the opinion that the appropriate multiplier in the case would be 16 in view of the dtetum of the Apex Court in the caseof Sarla Verma (Smt) and others Versus Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported in (2009) 6 Supreme Court //—i i'te. ^€/ Cases 121, wherein multiplier of 16 has been prescribed for the age group between 31 -35 years. 10) By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.24,000/- with the multiplier of 16, the compensation works out to Rs.3,84,000/-. The claimants are further entitled to receive Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses; Rs.5,000/- towards loss of consortium to the widow; and Rs.5,000/- for loss of estate. The claimants, thus, become entitled to receive a total sum of Rs.3,99,000/- as compensation for the death of deceased Jeevan Lal Thakur in the motor accident. 11) Learned counsel for the parties submitted that with a view to avoid any possible dispute between the parties about the period for which the claimants are entitled to receive interest on the enhanced amount of compensation, the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation may be quantified in this appeal itself. 12) Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter including the delay in disposal of the claim petition and the present appeal and the fact that the Insurance Company alone 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.1,07,000/- at Rs.13,000/-. 13) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal flled by the appellants/claimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed jn part. The compensatjon of Rs.2,92,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.3,99,000/- with further quantified amount of interest of Rs.13,000/- on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.1,07,000/-. 'T 14) Respondent No.3 the Reliance General Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the totai sum of Rs.1,20,000/- (Rs.1,07,000/- towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.13,000/- towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.1.07,000/-) before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 15) No order as to costs. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge padma