r HIQH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: Appellants Claimants HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEVGUPTA, CJ. HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR,J Misc Appeal No. 1081 ot 2004 1 Bukko Bai Madvi, W/o Late Jugru Madvi aged about 30 years 2 Baliram Madvi, S/o Late Jugru Madvi agedabout16years Appellant No.2 minor through mother and natural guardian, appellant No.1 Bukko Bai. Both R/o Village Sirhapara, Takraguda, Post Badajt, PS Lohandiguda, Dist Bastar (CG) Respondents Non-applicants VERSUS Ranpal @ Ratehpal Singh, s/o late Dullchand, agedabout 35 years, Driver, r/o Defence Mlnistry Office, Aghanpur, 54(1) Dharampura 1 Jagdalpur Chowki, Dharampur Bastar (CG) MK Venkatesh, S/o MR Muniswami, aged about 42 years, JTR & T Organisation, R/o Defence Ministry Office, Aghanpur, 54(1) Dharampura 1 Jagdalpur Chowki, Dharampur Bastar Union of India Through Secretary Defence Ministry, Indian Govemment New Delhi Miscellaneous Appeal under Sectfon 173 of MotorVehicleAct Present : Shri Prafull Bharat, learned counsel for the appellants. Shri Bhjshma KSnger, counsel for the respondents. c" ORDER (8th November.2010) The following order of the Court was passed by RajeevGupta, CJ. This is daimants' appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Fourth Addittonal Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jagdalpur (for short *the Tribunal') vide award dated 09.08.2004, passed in Claim CaseNo.24/2004. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.12,11,000/-, claimed by the appellants/claimants, unfortunate widow and minor son of deceased Jugru Madvi by fjling a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor acddent on 02.09.2002, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,94,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of the filing of the claim petition till the date of actual paymerrt. 3) The Tribunal on a close scrutlny of the entire evidence led before it held that deceased Jugru Madvi died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 02.09.2002; the accident occurred due to rash and negtigent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Tmck bearing registration No.OOP/13327-H belonging to the Ministry of Defence, Govemment of India; as such, the driver and owner of the offending vehicle Truck were Hable to pay compensation to the claimants. 4) As the respondents have not filed any appeal against the award, the above findings recorded by the Tribunal have now -^ttamed finality. 5) The Tribunal assessed the tncome of the deceased at Rs.2,000/- per month. By deductlng Rs.700/- per month towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.1,300/- per month and Rs.15,600/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.15,6007- with the multiplier of 10, the compensation was worked out to Rs.1,56,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.38,000/- under other heads, the Tribunal awarded a total sumof Rs.1,94,000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Jugru Madvi in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.1,94,000/- @ 9% per annum from the date of the filing of the claim petitjon till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri Prafull Bharat, learned counsel for the appeHants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in selecting the lower multipllerof 10 and jn awarding low compensation of Rs.1,94,000/-only. 7) Shrl Bhishma^nger, leamed counsel for the respondents on the other hand supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.1,94,000/- awarded bythe Tribunal cannot be termed as inadequate so as to warrant enhancement in th'is appeal. 8) In a motor accident claim case what is important is that the compensation to be awarded by the Courts / Tribunals should be just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the case. It should neither be a meageramount of compensation, nor a bonanza. ^s^ ^••i.y:^^''' 9) Now, we shall examine as to whether the compensafion of Rs.1,94,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 10) True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Jugru Madvl used to eam Rs.4,000/- per month from his agriculture and also working as a labour, the evidence led in that behalf is not of olinching nature. In this state of evidence, we do not find any fautt in the approach of the Tribunal In discarding the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased and in assessing his income on its own estimate at Rs.2,000/- per month and Rs.24,000/- per annum. 11) By deducting the usual 1/3rd of Rs.24,000/- per annum, the claimants' dependency is assessed at Rs.16,000/- per annum. The multiplier of 10 selected by the Tribunal is certainly on the lower side and requires reconsideration. 12) Considering the age of the deceased, his widow and their son, we are of the opinion that multiplier of 15 would be appropriate in the present case. 13) By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.16,000/- with the multiplier of 15, the compensation works out to Rs.2,40,OCX)/-. The daimants are further entitled to receive Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses; Rs.5,000/- for loss of estate; and Rs.5,000/- for loss of consortium to the widow. The claimants, thus, become entitled to receive a total sum of Rs.2,55,000/- as compensation for the death of deceased Jugru Madvi in the motor accident. .,..;;::•:"-:. ^ t( '.:.,i|rej. ••-^/i/'' ';;n'I-^:: 14) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal fited by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs.1,94,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.2,55,000/-. The enhanced amount of compensation shall carry Snterest @ 6% per annum from the date of the filing of the claim petition till the date of aetual paymeni 15) No order as to costs. Sd/- Chief Justice padma r Sd/- ;R.N.Cfaandrakar Judge