4 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGAIW AT BBLASPUR DIVIStON BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUFTA, C.J. & HON'BLESHRI RANGNATH CHftNIMRAKAF^ J. Appellants Misc. Appeal (C»No. 270 of 2011 1. Kunti Bai, Wd/o Manoj Kumar Salui, aged about 32 years 2. Gunaram, S/o Late ^4anoj Kumar Sahu, aged about 15 years 3. Tritochan, S/o Late Manoj Kumar Sahu, agea about 12yeara 4. Naresh Kumar, S/o Late Manoj Kumar Sahu, aged about 9 years 5. Ku Sampati, D/o Late Manoj Kwnar Sahu, aged about 6 years 6. Ku Reenu, D/o Late Manoj Kumar Sahu, aged about 3 yeare 7. Jambai, W/o Heeravan Sahu,aged about58years 8. Heeravan, S/o ortehra Sahu, aged about 62 years Respondents No.2 to 6 are minors, through their natural gua'dian mother Kunti Bai All are residwrts of Viltage Saigaon, , Potice Station Hirri, Tahstl Mungeti, District B!laspur(CG) VERSUS Respondents 1. Hemsingh, Slo CWntaram Sahu, aged about 28yeais, Driver ofTnx* No.CO-04J-^02, R/o Wlfage Rawa, Police Station Arjuni. Distrkst Dhamtari (CG) ~-:s K ;B-.>ly ^" -•'aiaE^ 2. Ssrtyanarayan, S/o Bisandayal Sharma, aged aboirt 35 yeare, Owner of Truck NoGG-04-J-2502. 3. Reliance Generat Insurance Company LlmKed, Shop No.412-413 Fourth Floor, Raw Bhawan, Jafstambh Chowk, Raipur (CG). MISC. APPEAL UN R SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES JUTT. 1988. Present: Shri P.P. Sahu and Shri S.P. Sahu, coareel fwlhe appellants. ORDER »rd (03raMarch,20t1) The followng order of the Cowt waa passed by RajeevGu|rta, CJI. Shri P.P. Sahu and Shri S.P. Sahu, l^med counselfwthe appellants are heard onadmisskm. 2) The appetlants are seeWng enhancement of the compensation avrarded by the T Acldittonal Motor Accxtent Claims Tritainal, Mut^eli, di^rid Bitaspur (for short, the Tribunal') vlcto awarddated 26.10.2010, passed In Claim Caae No. 12/^)10. 3) As ^pinst the compensation of Rs.27,50,000/- clrimed by theappetlants/clalmants,unforfamatewklow, minorcNldren and parents of deceased Manqj Kumar Sahu, t^ filing a claim patttjon under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in tt»e motor aecident on 02.12.2009, the Tribunal awareted a totsrfsum of Rs.3,93,50)/- as compensation to the claimants along vwth ^ !i /^' "^S&Xrf1- ""^^ss^s^' interest @ 9% per annum from tt»e date of fllfng of the claim petition Ull the date of actual payment. 4) Shri P.P. Sahu and Shri S.P. Sahu, teamwi counwl forVw appellants vehemently argued that the Tribunal has erred In not accepting the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased and in assesang his income at Rs.3,000/- per month and Rs.36,000/- per annunronly; in seteding fte lower muttiplier of 16; and in awarding low eompensation of Rs.3,^,500/- only; 5} True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Manoj imar Sahu used to eam Rs.9,000/- per month by vrorkir^ umter a contrartor, the evnlence led in that behalf was nat of dinching nature. Frem para 17 ofthe impugnedaward we gather ttiatthe claimants did not examlne the contractor unda- whom the claimants claimed that the deceased used to work, to ^tabli^i the nature of the occupation of the deceased and his income to the extent of Rs.9,(XX)/- |»rmonth. In this state of evidenee, we cto not find any fault in the approach of the Tribunal in discarding the claimants' evidence about the imsome of the deceased aml in assessing hls income at Rs.3,000/- per month airi Rs.%,00(V- per annum. 6) The claimants'dependency ateo has been righlly asse»s«i by the Tribunal by deducting the usial 1/y ofthe jnccwie ofthe deceased towards his personal expen^s. •c SS-h. S ^%: '^ 7) The multiplierof 16 selectedby Vhe Tritwnal (xinsidering that deceased Manoj Kumar Sahu wrasaged about 34 yeara on the date ofthe accident cannot be found fault wtth. 8) For the foregoing reasons, we do not flml any scope for enhancement of the compensation either on accourrt of the assessment of the income of the deceased or the claimants' dependency by the Tribunal orthe multiplierselected. 9) The appeal flled by the appetlants/ claimants for enlTanoement of the compensation, therefore, is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed summarity. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge nlmmi