@ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON’BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, CJ. HGN’BLE $HRI SUNIL KUMAR SINHA, J. Misc. Aggeal No. 1147 of 2003 1. Phoolchand Kothari, age 66 years, s/o late Shri Labhchandji Kothari (Father of deceased) APPELLANTS AppHcants 2. Smt. Leela Bai Kothari, age 60 yeatrs wlo. Shri Phobichand Kothari (Mother of deoeased) I Address : Phoolchand Kothari Opp. Jabarehand & Company Azad Chowk, Rajnandgaon. VERSUS Balwant Singh s/o. not known, aged about 55 years, resident of Prabhat Colony, Gopal Nagar, Bhusawal, (Maharashtra), Father of the deceased R-1. 2 Sheikh Abdut Rahman, sio Sheikh Kadar vittage : Salegaon - Bhushawat, diStt. Jalgaon (M.S.) Driver of Truck NoMWD-Q601 3 The New tndia Insurance Company Ltd, through Branch Manager, Unit No.160703, 4/752, First Floor, Dr. Rote Building, Jhankar Road, Bhushaval 425201., Distt. Jalgaon (M.S.) Resggndents ' Non—appEcants insurer of Tata Diesel Truck No. MD-9601. 4 The New India Assurance Company Ltd. through Branch Manager, Branch Office, First Floor, Kamptee Line, Rajnandgaon (C.G.) Branch Office of insurance Company at Rajnandgaon. W MISC. APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT Present: Shri Malay Kumar Bhaduri, Iearned counsel for the appeuants. Shri Shree Kumar Agrawal, learned Senior CounSel with Shri Anand Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for respondents No.3 & 4. ORDER (15m December, 2010) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, CJ This is claimants’ appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the First Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rajnandgaon, (for short ‘the Tribunal’) vide award dated 29.08.2003, passed in Claim Case No.246/2002. 2) As against the compensation of Rs‘5,50,000/- claimed by the appellants/ claimants, unfortunate father-in—law and mother-in—law of deceased Smt. Anjana, by frling a claim petition under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, for her death in the motor accident on 01 05.2002, the Tribunal awarded a totalsum of Rs.1,72,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 3) r The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held that the deceased Smt. Anjana died on account of the injuries sustained by her in the motor accident on 01 «05-2002; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Truck bearing registration No.MWD-9601; as e the above offending vehicle Truck, on the date of the accident was insured with the New India Insurance Company Limited and the insurance Company could not establish any breach of the poiicy‘ conditions, the Insurance Company was Iiable 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 attained finality. 5) The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- per annum. By deducting 1/3” of Rs.15,000/— towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants’ dependency was assessed at Rs.1 0,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.10,000/- with the multiplier of 17, the compensation was worked out to Rs.1,70,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs‘2,000/- towards funeral expenses, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,72,000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Smt. Anjana in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.1 ,72,000/- @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri Malay Kumar Bhaduri, learned counsel for the appellants vehemently argued that the Tribunal has erred in awarding low compensation of Rs.1,72,000/— only though the appellants were wholly dependent on the deceased. 7) Shri Shree Kumar Agrawal, leamed Senior Counsel with Shri Anand Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for respondents No.3 & 4 - The New India Insurance Company Limited, on the other hand contended that the Tribunal has erred in awarding compensation to the claimants though they are not the legal representatives of their daughter~in—law, deceased Smt. Anjana. 8) ln a motor accident claim case, what is important is that, the compensation to be awarded by the CourtslTribunals should be iust and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the case. It should neither be a meager amount of compensation, nor a Bonanza. 9) Now we shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.1,72,000/— awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 10) The claimants themselves pleaded that deceased Smt.Anjana was an household lady. As the deceased was not having any independent income of her own, we do not find any infirmity in the assessment of the income of the deceased by the Tribunal on the basis of her contribution in the household work. 11) The claimants’ dependency also has been rightly assessed by the Tribunal by deducting the usual 1J3” of the income of the deceased towards her personal expenses. t2) The multiplier of 17 selected by the Tribunal is rather on the higher side considering that the claimants were aged about 66 and 61 years, respectively. 13) For the foregoing reasons, we do not fmd any scope for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 14) The appeal med by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation, therefore, is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed. 15) No order as to costs. Sdl- Sd/— Chief Justice ._;