r^\S'1 Si¥isio^,3sn'* C^- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR fC..G.) Miscellanious ApDeal fONo-I2./lf /2009 APPELLANT -L. t'.S.--'^ ?^^.:; wM^ -^'K^:^ Uw^' ^^«^v The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Parmanand Bhawan Rajendra Park Chouk, Durg Distt. - Durg (C.G.) Through Divisional Manager, Divisional OfBce Durg, Durg (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS ^l. Nar siagh Yadav S/o Chandrika Yadav, aged about 46 years, 2. Smt.Meena Bai W/o Nar singh Yadav, "> aged about 43 years, Both R/o ViIIage Janjgiri, P.S. Anda, Tah. & Distt. Durg (C.G.) ^ 3. Seeta Ram Sahu S/o SamaUya Sahu, s aged about 40 years, R/o Village Medesara, P.S. Nandni, Tah. Dhamdha, Distt. Durg (C.G.) 4. Smt. Sah'inder Kaur W/o Manjeet Singh Chawala, aged about 41 years, R/o H..I.G.-97, HUDCO bhilai, Tah. & Distt. Durg (C.G.) MISC. APPEAL rCLAIM) UNDER SECTION 173 OF MOTOR VEHICLE ACT.^988 Appeal valued Rs.3.32.240=00 ffts.Three Lac Thirfrv Two Thousand Two Hundred Fourtv VOnlv ') HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR APPELLANT RESPONDENTS M.A.(C)No. 1214/2009 The Oriental Insurance Company Limited Versus Nar Singh Yadav and others DB:- HON'BLE SHRI I.M. QUDDUSI & HON'BLE SHRI N.K. AGARWAL. JJ PRESENT:- Shri Vipin Tiwari, Advocate for the appellant. None appears for the respondents. ORAL ORDER (24-9-2010) Per I.M. Quddusi. J 1. Case is called out. No one appears for the respondents No. 1 and 2/claimants despite service ofnotice. 2. This appeal has been filed by the appellant/Insurance Company against the impugned award dated 28-2- 2009 passed by the XIth Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (FTC), Durg in Claim Case No. 77/2007 only on the ground of quantum. The appellant/Insurance Company was granted permission under Section 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (briefly, the Act'). 3. . Facts of the case in brief are that Ashok Yadav was working as helper in the truck bearing registration No. CG-07-C/3817. On 12-5-2007, when he WSLS going in the said truck as helper from Durg to Latur, on Sangali Menai bridge, the driver .of the truck by driving the truck in a rash and negligent manner, dashed a Tata Sumo vehicle bearing registration No. MH-24-G/5609, as a result of which, Ashok Yadav died. The claimants being mother and father filed an application under Section 166 of the Act claiming Rs 17,10,000/- as compensafion for the death of the deceased. -/ -r"%''%. ''.'t '^^, ^ ^: ^^'i'*'' - ]^ vsS. s ^s ,JW' y^, ^ y •>. 4. Learned Tribunal awarded Rs. 3,32,240/- to the claimants and as against the driver, owner and insurer. 5. The age of the deceased who was unmarried, was aged 25 years at the time of accident and as such, in view of the judgment in the matter of Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay -v- Laxman lyer and another reported in (2003) 8 SCC 731 wherein it has been held that in those cases where the claim.ants are parents of the deceased, multiplier should never exceed 10. Para 12 of the judgment in the matter of Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay (supra) is as under:- "12. Keeping in view the observations made by this Court in various cases, several other factors need to be taken note of. The deceased was unmarried. The contribution to the parents who had their separate earnings being employed and educated have releyance. The possibility of reduction in contribution once a person gets married is a reality. The compensation is relatable to the loss of contribution or the pecuniary benefits. The multiplier adopted by the Tribunal and confirmed by the High Court is certainly on the higher side. Considering the age of the claimants it can never exceed 10 even by the most liberal standards........." 6. In the instant case, the Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased who was helper as Rs. 2,602/- on the basis of minimum wages for unskilled worker which was applicable with effect from 1-4-2007 to 30-9-2007 the period during which the deceased died. The Tribunal has not added any allowance in the above amount which the deceased would have received during his working. Therefore, if take the income of the -deceased in round figure as Rs. 3000/- per month, it 'Ks\ 7. 8. will come to Rs. 36,000/- per annum. After deducting 1/3rd of the yearly income of the deceased towards his personal expenses, the yearly loss of dependency would be worked out to Rs. 24,000/-. Since the dependents are parents, therefore, in view of the dictum of Apex Court in the matter of Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombav (supra), the appropriate multiplier would be 10. By applying the multiplier of 10, the amount would come to Rs. 2,40,000/- towards loss of dependency. By adding Rs. 20,'OOQ/- as awarded by the Tribunal towards other heads, the total amount for which the claimants are entitled comes to Rs. 2,60,000/-. The Tribunal has awarded Rs. 3,32,240/-. In view of the above, the appeal is allowed in part. The impugned award is modified to the extent that the claimants shall be entitled for an amount of Rs. 2,60,000/- as compensation in place of Rs. 3,32,240/- as awarded by the Tribunal, along with interest at the rate of 8% per annurn from the date of application till its payment. Rest of the award shall remain intact. No order as to costs. Sd/- I.M.Quddussi Judge Sd/- N.K.Agarwal Judge