^•1 l'.asi>^lj .[ .,'SSb ^lijgp^l it.!:litiS3 / DJViSJON IR." 3. 4. 5. 6. 3. induial Bareth, BhagWani, aged about 50 years, Caste-Dhobi, Occu.-Labour, R/o. telakachhar, Bafco Nayar, Korba, Tah. & Distt. - Korba ('C.G.i. iareth, aaed about 16 Ku. Phuteshwari Bareth, aged about /esrs, Minor Dilesh, aged about 12 years, Minor Janki, aged about 10 years, Minor Ku. Shanti, aged about 7 years, Minor Sanad Kumar, aged about 3 years, Ail are R/b. Beiakachhar, Balco Nagar, Korba, Tah. & Distt.- Korba (C.G.). Appellant No.1 is a Legai Guardian of No.2 to 7. ir, S/o. A.P. Mc aged about 26 years, Occu.-Driver, R/'o. Sector-5 Mourya Hote!, Balco Nagar, Korba, Tah. & Distt.- Korba (C.G.I Juneja, S/o. Late Godhar Juneja, aged about years, R/'o. Torwa, Bilaspur, Distt.-Bilaspur (C.G.) Oriental Insurance Co., Branch - Korba, through - Branch Manager Oriental insurance Co. Ltd., Clty iranch Office, B-E tt.- ESI E£^iL?idE^ ;.G.) ^:^ .^^^V ^J Jf ••^- ^y T ? MQTOR VEHICLES ACT, 198S 'lhs :. •tI3.RB!?' ;'Ea:i|iiJ!|i; t, Shri Rishi Rahul Soni, (earned counsei for the appeElants. iSh The followina order of the Court was passed Shri Rishi Rahu! Soni, iearned counsel for the sppeliants is heard on M.C.P. No.1639/2004, a petition for condonation of detay in filing the appeal. 2) On due consideration, M.C.P. No.1639/2004 is allowed and the deiay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned. 3) Shri Rishi Rahul Soni, iearned counsel for the appeliants is heara' on admission. 4) The appellants are seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunai, Korba, (for short 'the Tribunai') vide award dated 15-03-2003, passed in Claim Case No.87/1999. 5) As against the compensation of Rs.13,35,000/- claimed by the appeilants/claimants by fiiing a ciaim petition under Section 166 of the/'Motor Vehicles Act for the death of deceased f Budhwara Bai in the motor spcident on 19-09-1999, the TribunaS awarded 3 tota! sum of Rs.2,55,200/- as compensation along wlth interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petitipn, til! the date of actual payment. . 6) Shri Rishi Rahul Soni, learned counsel for the appellants -vehemently argued that the Tribunal has erred in assessing the 'tl rEs. Si& ^ income of the deceased at Rs.2,000/- per month only; in selecting the lower muitiplier of 14; and In awarding low compensation ot Rs.2,55,200/- oniy. 7) True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Budhwara Bai used to earn Rs.3,000/- per rrronth by selling vegetables, but the evldence ied by the ciaimants in that behalf was not of ciinching nature. We, therefore, do not find any inflrmity in the assessment of the income of the deceased bv the Tribunal at Rs.2,000/- 8) The cialmants' dependency also has been rightly assessed by fhe Tribuna! by deducting 1/3 of the income of the deceased towards her personal expenses. 3) The multipiier of 1 4 selected by the Tribunai also cannot be found fault with in vlew of the fact that deceased Budhwara Bai was aged about 45 years and her husband was aged about 50 years on the date of the accident. 10) We, therefore, do not Tind any scope for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal either on account of the assessment of the income of the deceased or the clgimants' dependency by the TribuRal or the muitiplier selected. 11) The appeal filed by the appeliants under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act for enhancement of the compensation, therefore, is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dlsmissed summarilv. ^ ^- Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge nimmi