1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL NO.1398 OF 2009 1. Shaikh Mujeeb S/o Shaikh Majeed Age : 37 years, Occ : Labour, R/o Basmath, Tq.Basmath, Dist. Hingoli. 2. Lailabee w/o Shaikh Mujeeb Age : 30 years, Occ : Household, R/o As above. APPELLANTS VERSUS Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, through its Divisional Collector, Gangakhed Road, Parbhani. RESPONDENT .... Mr. P.S. Agrawal, Advocate for appellants Mr.A. D. Wange, Advocate for respondent. .... (CORAM : K. U. CHANDIWAL, J) DATE :5th January, 2010. ------------------------------ ORAL JUDGMENT : 1. Heard respective Counsel. The matter is finally heard at the admission stage. 2. In the accident, Fareenbee, aged 7 years, 2 studying in 2nd class, lost her precious life. Her parents moved Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 288/2005, seeking compensation in terms of Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The learned Member, on evaluation of evidence, by an order dated 17th March, 2009, assessed same to the tune of Rs.75,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. This order of the learned Member is felt by the original claimants/parents of the deceased to be inadequate and not in the statutory manner, and hence, subject of challenge. 3. The non-controversial matter is age of the deceased and her taking education in 2nd standard. Naturally, she was not earning hand at the material time. The Counsel representing claimant/appellant informed that in the light of the recent pronouncement of the Apex Court reported in 2009 AIR SCW 4381 (R. K. Malik and another V/s Kiran Pal & ors), the adequate compensation should have been more than Rs.1,17,000/- as it also fits in tune with the schedule provided under section 163-A (6) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, where the loss is of non-earning person. 3 4. The Counsel representing the respondents- M.S.R.T.C. by citing the Judgment in the matter of Lata Wadhwa and others V/s State of Bihar and others (AIR 2001 SUPREME COURT 3218) and also to the judgment in the matter of Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. V/s Syed Ibrahim and others (AIR 2008 Supreme Court 103) has stated that there is no error on the part of the learned Member in awarding the compensation of Rs. 75,000/-, in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court. 5. The above position of law is spelt out in the Judgment of Apex Court in the case of R. K. Malik and another V/s Kiran Pal and ors (2009 AIR SCW 4381) and in the matter of New India Assurance Co. Ltd., V/s Satender and ors (AIR 2007 Supreme Court, 324(1) needs to be seen. In the matter of New India Assurance Co. referred above, the death was of a child of 9 years and the Apex Court confirmed the compensation of Rs. 1,80,000/-. 6. The determination of damages for loss of 4 human life and particularly in the case of non-earning member is difficult task. It has baffling effect when the parents have lost their budding child from whom they have hope in the life. The sorrow state of affairs and suffering of the parents needs to be looked into. 7. The parameter indicated in the above referred judgments, require that there should be interference in the Award granted by the learned Member, as spelt out in paragraph no.15 of the judgment of the learned Member. Considering the age of the deceased, the loss suffered by the parents, the adequate and just amount of compensation should have been Rs.1,25,000/- (Rs.One Lacs Twenty Five Thousand). The compensation of Rs. 1,25,000/- is, by applying multiplier of ten and taking notional income of deceased. The compensation is not a windfall or bonanza to the claimants as, loss of child needs its due consideration. In the result appeal is allowed, as follows:- The order under challenge awarding an amount of Rs.75,000/- is set aside. Instead thereof, the 5 respondent to pay compensation of Rs.1,25,000/- including Rs.25,000/- under the head of no fault liability with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from 18th November, 2005 (date of Petition before the learned Member) with costs throughout. (K. U. CHANDIWAL) JUDGE gas/fa1398.09