IN THE HIGH C00OT W Jin>iadltmE: CHHMTI^ M.A.(C) W> ^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^ c-r^ sa9^aiseS APPELIANfS ?PLICANTS ^- y Smt. SaFaswatil 'si^|^a aged 32 yrs [ wd/o Shri Sushil Yadav ":); Sai1eridra Yadav aged 13 yrs , ^: ^ ^o. ^ ^ '^^---•/ ti^^ Jay^^^^^^^^^K ^""^'J^e)^,:'i9ed.l:6''^ -^^^- i *MS'^.^ .^ .4. Ku. Richa Yadav SLqed Q^^^^^^ y^^ no 2 and 3 arelson and 4 is- daughter of Shri SushiI Yadav represented through mother All r7o : .1 Ra j ak CQ1ony,L Manga1a Distt--BilaspurjCG - VERSUS - 'r • -.' :1 • ^^PONDENTS ^ON-APPLIGANTS ^ ;- Gulab Chand PateI aged 2& yrs 1 s/o Stei Ramh.if Patel r/o : Behind D.P.Vipra College, Tikarapara Distt-Bilaspur CG ^- ^ M/S Mahadev Tran^^^ Services . 1 c/o Mohd. Ha s an khan aged 50 yrs i s / o Shr:±^ I^^^^^M^ r/o Infront of Hotel Anand Distt-Bilaspur CG ;The New Indj-a^Insuranc^ CQ.Limifed Through : The iDivisiorial Wanaqerr^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ The New Indj-ai Insurance Co.li^miite^^^^^^-^^^^^ ^^^^^ :Divisional-0^fice,^^ R Plaza,-Bus-Stand, Bi ^ APPEAL FOR ENHANCEMENT OF AWABD UNDER SECTION 173 OF MOTOR VEHICLE- ACT 1988 \ H[GHCOURTOFCHHATTISGAR Misc. Appeal (0 No. 1641 of 2008 APPILLANT AppSicant BESPQNDENTS Non-app!icants Smt. Saraswati Yadav & others. Versus Gulab Chand Patel & others. MisceSlaneous appeal under Sectioh 173 ofthe Motor VehidesAct.1988 S.B: Hon'ble Mr.Justice N.K.Aaarwai Present : Shri Anurag Dayal Shrivastava, counset for the appellants. Shri Deepak Gupta, counsel for respondent No.3. AWARD (30.09.2011) With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finaily. 1. This is claimants' appeal seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the First Additionai Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur (for short 'the Tribunal') in claim case No. 31 /2008 vide award dated 28.8.2008. ^ 2. As against compensation of Rs. 32,65,000/" claimed by unfortunate widow and children of deceased Sushil Kumar Yadav by filing application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act') for the death of deceased in the motor accident on 06.01.2008, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs. 8,38,540/- along with interest @ 6 percent per annum from the date of appfication till its actual payment. The Tribunal, on a close scrutiny of the evidence led, held : the accident had occurred due to rash and negiigent driving of offending vehicle bus bearing registration No. CG 10-ZA/0412 by its driver i.e. respondent No. 1; deceased Sushil Kumar Yadav died on account of injuries sustained by him in the said accident; respondent No. 3/lnsurance Company liable for \Fb> payment of compensation as it could not establish the violation of policy conditions; assessed and awarded aforementioned amount of compensation to the claimants along with interest @ 6 percent per annum from the date of accident tii! Its actual payment. MiriiiUiii^ Shri Anurag Dayai Shrivastava, learned counsel for the appeiiants would submit: the Tribunai has fallen In error in taking into consideration the income of the deceased as Rs.6,430/- after deducting Rs.850/- from his saiary of Rs.7,280/- and thereby erred in awarding low amount of compensation. On the other hand, Shri Deepak Gupta, learnsd counsel appearing for respondent No. 3/ New Indianl Snsurance Company Limited, supported the award impugned and submitted, in the facts and circumstances of the case, compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation and does not call for any interference. i have heard the iearned counsel appearing forthe parties and perused the materiat available on record including award impugned. 7. Deceased Sushil Kumar Yadav was working as Assistant Grade -IEJ under the S.D.O., Forest, Dharamjaigarh and vi/as getting satary at Rs.7,280/- per month. Learned Tribunal after deducting Rs.850/- (Rs.700/- towards G.P.F. + Rs.150/- towards G.I.S.) from Rs. 7,280/- has taken into consideration his saiary at Rs.6,430/- per month and Rs.77,160/- per annum, for the purpose of computation of compensation. 8. After deducting 1/3rd of Rs.77,160/- towards personal expenses of the deceased, the Tribunal assessed the ciamants' annual dependency as Rs.51,440/-. Looking to the age of deceased as 35 years at the time of accident, the Tribunai selected /£'"^^ ! 1 ""^i i/ ;-.Y"^:^ multiptier of 16. By multiplying Rs.51,440/- with the multiplier of 16, the Tribunal awarded Rs.8,23,040/- as compensation on account of loss of dependency to the claimants. The Tribunal further awarded Rs. 15,500/- on other heads and thus awarded a total sum of Rs. 8,38,540/- as compensation to the claimants. The core questlon therefore arises for determination is whether the Tribunal was correct in deducting amount of GPF and GIS i.e. Rs.850/- from the salary of the deceased for the purpose of computation of total income of the deceased on the basis whereof the amount of compensation payable for the death of bread earner of the ciaimants is required to be determined. 10. Hon'bte Supreme Court by its various pronouncement ( Helan C. Rebelio (Mrs.) and others vs. Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporationand another reported in (1999) 1 SCC 90, United tndia Insurance Co. Ltd. and others reported in (2002) 6 SCC 281, Raghuvir Singh Matolya and others vs. Hari Singh Malviya and others reported in (2009) 15 SCC 363 and National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Indira Shrivastava and others reported in (2008) 2 SCC 763) has held : the amount of GPF and GIS should be included for the computation of income of the deceased on the basis whereof, the amount of compensation payable for the death of bread earner of the claimants is required to be determined. 11. ln view of above, in my considered opinion, the Tribunai has erred in deducting Rs.850/-from the salary of the deceased while computing compensation. Therefore, ! propose to recompute the amount of compensation by taking salary of the deceased as Rs.7,280/- per month and Rs.87,360/- per annum. ^,..' '•^ '^£,.,s^^i ..t? n? 12. After deducting usual 1/3rd of Rs. 87,360/- towards persona! expenses of the deceased, claimants yearly dependency works outtoRs.58,240/-. 13. Looking to the age of deceased as 35 years at the time of accident, the multipiier of 16 applied by the Tribunal is appropriate in view of the dictum of Supreme Court in case of Saria Verma iSmt.} and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another reoorted in (20091 6 SCC 121 wherein for the age group of 31 to 35 years, multiplier of 16 has been prescribed. 14. The appellants/claimants wouid become entitled for Rs. 9,31,840/-as compensation on account of ioss of dependency. The claimants/appellants are further entitled for Rs. 15,000/- on other heads (Rs. 5000/- each on account of funeral expenses, loss of consortium and loss of estate), and thus the claimants are entitled for a total sum of Rs. 9,46,840/- as compensation instead of Rs. 8,38,540/- as awarded by the Tribunal. 15. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants for enhancement of the compensation is atlowed in part. The compensation of Rs. 8,38,540/- awarded by the Tribunaf is enhanced to Rs. 9,46,840/-. The appellants/ciaimants are further entitfed to receive Rs.1,08,300/- over and above the amount awarded by the Tribunal. Enhanced amount of Rs.1,08,300/- shall carry interest @ 6% per annum. 16. The respondent No. 3/lnsurance Company is granted three months time to deposit enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.1,08,300/- aiong with interest @ 6 % per annum from the date of application before the concemed Claims Tribunal. 17. No order as to costs Sd/- N. K. Agarwal Judge ^