IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH ATBILASPUR M.A.fC^ No. \(0? / /2008 APPELLANT .^on-ADDlicant No.31 ?^j| ,^' •?cb-^^ A^ ^^^ -?•* ^yc^^ ^l^ ^.^- , .f^,^- ...••^ 0'-^": ...-•" ^"" RESPONDENTS fApplicants) ie New India Assurance ^^Co. Ltd., Divisional Office- Bhilai, Branch Office, Sattigudi Chowk, Raigarh (C.G.) VERSUS Smt. Budhni Bai Wd/o. Kaleshwar Ram Vishwakarma, aged about- 40 years L Ku. Chandramukhi D/o. late Kaleshwar Ram, aged about- 18 years, 3. ^Minor Khirbhushan S/o. late Kaleshwar Ram, aged about- 13 years, 4,/Minor Ku. Shakuntala D/o. late Kaleshwar Ram, aged about- 10 years, 5. 6. Minor Ku. Bhagwati D/o. late Kaleshwar Ram, aged about 08 years, linor Niket Kumar S/o. late Kaleshwar Ram, aged about- 05 years, No. 3 to 5 through- guardian mother Smt. Budhni Bai Wd/o. late Shri Kaleshwar Ram Vishwakarma^R/o. Village Utaipali, P.S.- Pussore, Tahsil and District- -Raigarh (C.G.) ^ Jagga Singh S/o. Laxman Singh, aged about- 22 years, Occupation- Driver, R/o.- Lande, P.S.- Bagga Purana, District- Mega, Punjab MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL U/Sn730F MOTOR VEHICLE ACT, 1988 APPELLANT RESPONDENTS HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BSLASPLSR CORAM: Hon'ble Shri S.IVI. Quddusi. J. & Hon'ble Shri Prashant Kumar IVJishra, J. M.A.fClNo. 1671 of 2008 The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Versus Smt. Budhnj Bai and others. MISC. APPEAL UNDERSECTION 173 OF THE MOTORVEHICLE ACT. J988 Appearance: Shri A.K. Athaley, counse! for the appellant. Shri Roop Najk, counse! for respondents No. 1 to 6. ORAL ORDER (05/01/2011) FoSlowing oral order of the Court was passed by i. M. Quddusi. J. This appeal has been filed against the impugned award dated 29/08/2(X)S in Clajm Case No.07/2007 awarding total compensation of Rs.17,21,960/- along with sjmpte jnterest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the ciaim petition. (2) The brief facts of the case are that on 01/01/2005 deceased Kaleshwar Ram along with Pramod Soni was going to Litaipali in his own vehicle Kinetic Honda. When they reached near viilage Tetla, the Trailor bearing registration No.N.L. 2D/5095 which was driven by Jagga Singh dashed the vehicle, resulting death of Kateshwar Ram. Deceased was aged about 42 years and was working as Assistant Lineman in C.S.E.B., Rajgarh. His monthly salary was Rs.12.903/-. The claimants filed claim petition ctaiming Rs.36,31,720/- as compensation. (3) Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the insurer has got permission under Section 170 of the Motor Vehicle Act and he has /?~':\ ^:y ^:.. ^^^.^ ~<vss^£^y' -2-- chaiienged the award on two grounds, the first ground is that there was no proof of negligence on the part of the alleged offending vehicle and further the quantum has also wrongly been assessed. (4) With regard to the first question i.e. negljgence was not proved it is to be seen that instead of going towards jts left the vehicie was going at the middle of the road and the acddent had taken place at the position when the vehicte was at the middle of the road and not on the side of the road and therefore the spot itself proves the negligence on the part of the driver of the vehicie and it cannot be said that the driver was not driving the vehjcle rashiy and negligently, but we have also seen that the driver of Kinetic Honda was also not drMng the vehicle towards its left side but came at the middfe and resulting in colJision of both the vehicles and therefore it cannot be said that there was no negiigence on the part of the driver of the Kinetic Honda, therefore it is a case of contributory negligence and we assess the contributory negligence on the part of the driver of Kinetic Honda to the extent of 25%. (5) if we come to the quantum we see that the monthly jncome of the deceased has wrongly been caJculated as the amount paid by him towards (ncome Tax has also been counted towards his income. The amount shown in the pay slip is Rs.400/'- and therefore his monthly ineome counted as 14,108/- will be reduced. After deductjng Rs.400/- it comes to Rs.13,708/-. After multiplying 12 into th^same the annual income comes to Rs.1,64,496/-. (6) Since there are six claimants, therefore according to the case of Sarla Verma (Smt.) and others vs. De!hl Transport Corporatlon and another, reported in (2009) 6 S.C.C, 121 the standard deduction towards personaj living expenses of the deceased would be %. Therefore, after deducting % the amount comes to the Rs.1,23,372/- ^-"s, ^, fC.'l ^ & '~'^u^ ! (7) Further according to Sarfa Verma (Smt) and others vs. Delhi Trsinsport Cofporstson snd snothw (supra) multiplier of 14 would be applicable as the deceased was less than 45 years of age and more than 41 years. therefore the total amount comes to Rs.17,27,208/-. After deducting % i.e. towards contributory negligence, the total amount which can be sajd to be loss of dependency would come to Rs.12,95,406/-. (8) Besides above, the daimants are entitled to get Rs.5,000/- for loss of love and affection to the five children i.e.Rs.25,000/-, Rs.10,000/- for loss of consortium to the widow, Rs.5,000/- toward funeral expenses and Rs.10.000/- for loss of estate. Thus, tota! of this comes to Rs.50,000/- and after adding the amount of loss of dependency j.e. Rs.12,95,406/-. total amount comes to Rs.13,45,.406/- rounded to Rs.13.45,500/-. therefore, the ciaimants are entitled to get the above amount in all as compensation along with simpte interest already awarded by the Tribunal @ 7.5% from the date of fSJing of the claim petition. Rest of the condjtions mentioned in the award shali remain intact. Accordjngjy, the award is modified to the above extent. The appeal is allowed in part. (9) No order as to costs, Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge l^