IGI ICI Clai Smt Janak Bai, w/o Shobhit Ram Sahu, aged about 45 years 2 S it Ram Sahu, s/o- Mani Rai Sahu, aged about 48 years Soth are resident of Village - Satmar; Tehsll Gunderdehi, District Durg (CG) Parmeshwar, s/o Dashrath Sahu, aged about 20 years, r/o village - Satmara, Tehsil - Gunderdehi, District Durc presently at Makai Chowk, Dhamtari, District Dhamtari (CG) Owner & Driver United tndia Insurance Company Limited, through its Manager, Krishna Compiex, Kutchery Chowk, Raipur, District Raipur (CG) Insurer of the vehicle Present : Shri PR Patankar, counselforthe appeiiants. None for respondent No.1. Shri HB Agrawal, Senior Counsel with Shri Agrawal, counse! for respondent No.2. ith The fol order of the Court was passed by '^•a% SB;i^?». "^'". gf ^ii :T> ;y s.;_ ' • ! ^ WSSSBfe. S '"'aGSgJt j3 '% s '•"i... JS"' ;^' "•^^ 'y' ^-^' 2 I.A.C.No.571 of 2010 This is claimants' appeal for enhancement of the ;ompensation awarded by the 12 Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Durg (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 19.03.2010, passed in Ciaim Case No. 118/2009. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.7,59,( the appeliants/claimants, unfortunate parent of deceased Ku.Deepika Sahu by filing a claim petition under Section 166 ofthe Vehicles Act, for her death in the motor accident on 08.09.2009, theTribunal awarded atota! sum ofRs.1,11.000/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the ciaim petition tili the date of actual payment. 3) The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it he!d that claimants' dauahter Ku Deeoika Sahu died on account of the injuries sustained by her in the motor accident on 08.09.2009; the accident occurred due to rash and negiigent driving of the motorcyclist of the offending motorcycle bearing registration No.CG-05/4003; as the above offending motorcycle on the date of the accident, was insured with the United India Insurance Company Limited, and the Insurance Company could not establish any breach of the policy conditions, the insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimants. 4) .As the respondents have not filed any appeal against the award, the above findings recorded by ihe Tribunal have now attained finality. L ~1 • ^ ^lt M.A.C. No. 571 of 2010 ^o 5) The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- per annum on the basis of the notional income prescribed in the Second Schedule under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicle Act. By deducting 1/3 of the income of the deceased towards her personal expenses, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.10,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.10,000/- with the multiplier of 10, the compensation was worked out to Rs.1,00,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.11,000/- under other heads, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,11,000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of their daughter Ku Deepika Sahu in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.1,11,000/- 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition tiil the date of actual payment. 6) Shri PR Patankar, iearned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in awarding low compensation of Rs.1,11,000/- only, though the claimants' daughter Ku Deepika Sahu was a briliiant student and had a bright 7)' Shri HB Agrawal, learned Senior Counsel with Shri Pankaj Agrawal, learned counsel for respondent No.2 the United India insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending motorcycle on the other hand, supported the award and contended that as claimants' daughter Ku Deepika Sahu was not an earning member on the date of the- accident, the compensation of 4 I.A.C.NO.S71 of 2010 ^-"1 Rs.1,11,000/- awarded by the Tribunai is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 8) Claimants' daughter Ku Deepika Sahu was aged about 16 years on the date of the accident. She was studying in 10 standard. The clajmants are her father and mother aged about 48 years and 45 years respectively. Her father Shobhit Ram Sahu is an agriculturist. !t is true that deceased Ku Deepika Sahu was not having any independent income of her own at the time of the accident and the Tribunal has assessed her income at Rs.15,000/- per annum on the basis of the notional income prescribed in the Second Schedule under Sectlon 1 63-A of the Motor Vehicle Act. T'ne notional income of Rs.15,000/- was prescribed in the Second Schedule in the year 1994 and the unfortunate accident in the present case wherein claimants' daughter Ku Deepika Sahu lost her life took place in the year 2009. 9) The compensation of Rs.1,11 ,000/- awarded by the Tribunal, when examined in ths context of the above mentioned broad features of the case, in our opinion, is on the lower side deserves to be snhanced suitably. 10) Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, we are of the dpinion that further award of Rs.50,000/- inclusive of Interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation would make the compensation of Rs.1,11,000/- awarded by the Tribunal as just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. padma 5 M.A.C.No.571 of 2010 11) The appeal filed by the appellants/claimants for enhancement of the compensatlon, therefore, is allowed in part. The claimants are awarded further sum of Rs.50,000/- inclusive of Interest component on the enhanced amtiunt of compensation in addltion to the sum of Rs.1,11,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. 12) Respondent No.2 the United India Insurance Company is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.50,000/- before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 13) No order as to costs. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge f