^ '^•' r.^f IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH M.A.C.NO^T^ /201Q Qem APPELLANT :- National Insurance Company (Insurer/N.A.No-3) Lunited Trough Divisional Manager National Insurance Company Limited Raipur Trough Authorised Signatory National Insurance Conipany Liniited, Divisional Office: B-l Taha Complex, Ring Road II, Priydarshani Nagar, Bilaspur (C.G). VBRSUS ^ ^ ..•^•••', ••^•""A y^ ^ /\ 4" H".^^' RESPONDENTS:- 1. Gopal Nishad S/o Lt. Rama Nishad, (Claimants-R-l&2) aged about 48 years. 2. Smt. Shanti Bai W/o Gopal Nishad aged about 45 years. Resps. No. 1 85 2 R/o Village- Raveli P.S. and Tehsil- Abhanpur District Raipur (C.G.) (Driver) 3. Santosh Banjare age 32 years S/o Aghnu Ram Banjare aged R/o Village Hari Idbhata Sarona Thana Amanaka Raipur (C.G). (Owner) 4. Puran Lal Bajaj S/o Ladha Ram Bajaj R/o Idgah Bhata, Raipur Thana A^&d Chauk Raipur (C.G). APPEAL U/S 173 OF THE MOTOR VBHICLE ACT, 1988 hf^- COURT OF CHHATTISeARH AT BILASPUft &IVISION BENCH;- HON'BLE MR.NAWAL ASAftWAL. JJ. M.A.CC') No. 798/2010 Non-appilcant No.3 ftespofidents CiairnQnts, driver a owner Vs Natjonal Insurance Company Llmited 6ropal Nishad &. otherg PrCSC.Ijt^ ir. B.N. Nande, Advocate for the appellant, ~^r. S. Tandon, ndvocate for the r-espondents Nos. 1& 2. fflr. Adiroj Surana, Advocate for the respondent N0,3 & 4, I 1. 2. (Oral) (30th September, 2010) Quddysi. 3; Heord. The Qpp^iiant- ingurance compony hos fs'led this mjscejianeous appeal QQainst the avi/ard dated 02.12,2009 pQ^^ed in ClQim Cose No,15/2009 whereby the learned 10th Additional AAotor Accident CiQimsTrjbuno!, Raipur (C6) (for short 'the tribynai') has oiloyi/ed thc cfajm petition of respondent No,l & Z/ciaimQnts-pareiit^ of d'eceosed and awarded a sum of R^.4,20,000/n- as conipensQtion. Pcrniission under Section 170 of the Motor VehicJes Act, 1988 to contest the ciQlm on a!i available defences WQ^ granted to the Qppeiiant-insurance compony. However, the. appellont has fiied the in.stant oppeai on!y on the quegtion of quanturn. Focts of the case, ag projected in Pora-3 of thg InipuQned aword, ore.that on 2.12.2008 decea^ed Rajendra Prasad Nishad ^os going'os piiljon.rid.er on the motorcycie of Jaggu Nishad beorsnq registrQtion number C&04-C 5-4831. At obout 7,00 p»m» in.front of'Viiiaqe Lamkenj rood, the tractor beQring registration number C6r04-DAa"7665, di^iven in rash and negiigent nianner by nonra oppiicant driver., dashed the motorcycJe os Q resul't of ^hich both of them feil dawn ond sustainfed Qrievous jnjuries. JaQgu Nishad ,,:^/ ^^^^^' dicd on t.he spot, i^herea^ deceased RajendrQ died on way to the hogpitai. Report of the incident. WQS lodged irs Poiice Statjon Abhonpur on yi/hich criminai case has beeri regjster^d against the driver of vehicle^ The Qppeilants, who are parentg of .the deceaged ond aged about 48 & 45 years resp^ctively, have ciQimed compen^atjon to the tune- of R^,9,98,000/n' on the ground they were totdily depandent on their deceased son and on acco.unt of his death, they suff^red nfiento! and financia! Joss. 5. The tribunal, ofter congiderjng the isgueg franied by st, alloyved the ciasm Qpplgcation of the respondent No.l A 2 and awwded o compensation of Rs.4,20,000/- under varioug heads, 6. We have heard iearned counsel for the parties and peruscd the Impuqned award as also the record of the trlbunal beiow, 7» From perugal of record, it is evident that the iearned tribunal has as^egsed annual income of the deceosed at Rs.36,000/ta and after decSucting l./3rd toyi/ardg personal expenditure of the deceQsed, flxed the loss of in'come at Rs.24000/-, Further, thc claims tribLsnQJ, considering thc age of the deceosed, an un- mQrried boy, ag aigo the of the parents of the deceQsed, has applied muitipii^r of 17 Qceording to the ^econd scheduie and caiculated the cornpensation ot Rs.4,20,000/m, In the matter of ' ^eneral MQissffcr, S.R.T.C. -vs- T^was reported in (1994) 2 176. which has been foilowed in S^HQ ¥ert!iff ('S-wf.) ^fhers -vs- Trsffspffrf CffrporofiffR Qnofher reported In (2Q09) SCC J^l, the Hon'bie Supresme Court hcss heid that th^ choice of rnuitipli^s" is deterrnined by the of the deceased or that of th€'cloirpants whlchever is higher (see pars 13). It has been aiso said (vide Para 17) thot usualiy in EngSish Courts the oper°Qtiv@ multipiier rarely exceeds 16 as mQximurn and thig lyiil come down occordingiy as the age of th©deeeased person (or thot of the dependantg ^hichever . is higher) goes up. Besid^s thig, the Hon'ble SuDreme Court in the matter of Sarla Vermo's ca^e (supra) has heid that in. a where the deceased yyas bachelor and the parents are clQimcints; normaliy 50% is deducted '. "-£ast/ \^^€/ "y<-^^^"' 9. 10. 11. 12. © as p^r^onai and livsnQ expenses because it is assumed that o bQchelos'1 woald tend to sp^nd more on hinn as ^elf mQintenance. In light of the above judgment^ and considering-the age of the porentg of the deceased i.e. 48 & 45 yearg resp'ectively, we are of the oDinion that proper multjpii^r' in the instant cose i^oufd be 13 and not 17, as applied by the tribunai. Further, the tribunoi, in^tead of deducting l/3rd tovi/ardg pergonQJ and livjng expen^e^ of th@ deceased, ^hould have deducted 50%, as h@!d by the Hon'bie Ap^x Court in Sarlo Verma's case (supra), Accordingiy, jf wc deduct'50% frtirn the annua! income of the deceQged i.e, Rs,36,000/-, as as-sessed by the tribunai, the lo^s of income wouid come to RsABftOO/- p,a, and after appiying rinuJtipiier of 13 to it, the totai losg.of dependency would come to Rs. 2,3.4,000/- (Rs.18000x13). Further, the deceased was aged about- 2-0 yecars, therefore, the aDpeIlants have lost !ove and .affection forw/hich they .are entitied for RsJO.OOO/- each. Th@ ciaimarsts are o!so entltied for R.s.10,000/- to^ards ioss3 of estate and Rs,5000/- towards funerai exp^n^e^. Thus\ the toto! compensation come^ to Rs»2,69.,000/°a. The.refore, we modify the.award dated 2.12,2009 to the extent indicated obove and noyi/ the claimants/respondent No.l & 2 sahQiNJ be entitJed to get Rs.2,69,000/- as compensatlon along ^ith interest ©6% from the date of apDlication tilJ the poyment is nriGde..Rest of the conditions imposed by th^ tribunQl shoif remain intact, Ho^ever, yi/hatever amount has been deposited by the appellant-insurQnce company ^hail . be adjusted toi^ards the amount of coropensation a§ fixed' by this Court. The apDeoJ i^ •aliowed in part to the extent Indjcated Qbove. Sd/- LM.Quddusi Judge lo'shan'/- Sd/- N.K. Agavwal Judge