-^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH Coram : HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON"BLE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SiNHA, J. Misc. Appeat No. 179 of 2004 Smt. Jamuna W/o late Saidas C/o Son Singh S/o Sukharu, resident of village Pailigaon, Police Station Parpa, District Bastar (C.G.). CLAIMANT RESPONDENTS NON-APPLICANTS 1. 2. Sada Jha S/o Mod Jha C/o Bhola Jha S/o Sadanand Jha, resident of Baila Bazar, Jagdalpur, Distt. Bastar (C.G.) (DRIVER) Kamal Deo Jha S/o Sadanand Jha, resident of Baita Bazar, Jagdalpur, Di'stt. Bastar (C.G.) 3. The Orientat Insurance Company Ltd. Through : Branch Manager, Orientai Insurance Co. Main Road, Jagdalpur, Dist. Bastar (C.G.) MiSCELLANEOUS APPEAL UNDERSECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLE ACT 1988 Presenf: Shri Subhash Yadav, counsel forthe appellants. Nons for respondents No.1 and 2. Shri Shailendra Sharma, counsel for respondent No.3 •w (1Sm Ju!y, 2009) The following order of the Court was passed b\ lajeev Gupta, C.J.: j;i^S .ifeR, ^ ''^ S-i^J '"•,..^ ^s te;S^ i^y Learned counsel for the parties are heard on M.C.P. No. 227/2004, a petition for condonation of the delay in filing the appeal. 2. On due consideration of the submissions of leamed counsel for the appellant and the grounds' taken in the petition, we are satisfied that the appeliant hassucceeded in showing sufficient csuse for the deiay in filing the appeal. 3, M.C.P. No. 227/2004, therefore, is altowed and the delay of eight days in filing the appeal is hereby condoned. 4. Shri Subhash Yadav, learned counsel for the appellant is heard on admission. 5. Appeilant Smt. Jamana is seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Second Additional Motor Accidents Ciams Tribunal, Bastar at Jagdatpur (for short "the Tribunal") vide award dated 30.10.2003, passed in Claim Case No. 192/2002. 6. As against the compensation of Rs.11,30,000/- claimed by the appeilant/ claimant by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehlcles Act, for the death of her daughter Samridhi, aged^about 11 years in the motor accident on 13.04.2002, the Tribunal awarded a~ total sum of Rs.80,000/- as compensation ^ / along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the clalm petition till the date of actual payment. 7. Shri Subhash Yadav, learned counsel for the appellant yehemently argued that the Tribunal has erred in awarding low compensation of Rs.80,000/- only though the appeliant's daughter Samridhi was a brilliant student and had bright future. —-——.-• -TC-^-^L':^"^= 'N" ,(<T"""^ /ys-,. r i:,vS fe ' ^€S^^ •»,...^€ '*faais!.v N- 8. The Apex Court while considering as to what would be the just and proper compensation for the death of a child aged about seven years in the case of'Oriental Insurance Co. Lfd. v. Syed Ibrahim and others reported in 2007 (4) T.A.C. 385 (S.C.) observed in paras 9 and 10: "9. This Court in Lata Wadhwa (2001) 8 SCC 197, while computing compensation made distinction between the deceased children falling within the age group of 5 to 10 years and age group of 10 to 15 years. 10. In cases of young children of tender age, in view of uncertainties abound, neither their income at the time of death nor the prospects of the future increase in their income nor chances of advancement of their career are capable of proper determinatjon on estimated basis. The reason is that at such an early age, the uncertainties in regard to their academic pursuits, achievements in carrier and thereafter advancement in life are so many that nothina can be assumed with reasonable certainty. Therefore, neither is the income of the deceased child capable of assessment on estimated basis nor is the financial loss suffered by the parents capable of mathematical computation." The Apex Court in view of the above observations held that the compensation of Rs.51,500/- was just and proper .compensation for the death of a child aged about seven years. .' '^St, •-aa.. ii SSi^^ ^ g ff 9. Now, reverting to the present case, admittedty the appeilant's daughter Samridhi was aged about 11 years on the date of the accident. The compensation of Rs.80,000/- awarded by the Tribunal when examined in the context of the above quoted observations of the Apex Court irhth.e case of Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Syed Ibrahim and others (supra), we are satisfied, does not cali for any enhancement in this appeal. 10. The appeai, therefore, is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed summarily. : Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge SLlfcBU