.\ \c HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J. Appellants Applicants Misc. Appeal (C) No. 1030 of2008 1. Smt. Urmila Devi aged about 45 years w/o late Ramadhar Yadav caste Yadav (wife) 2. Ku. Asha Devi, aged about 17 years, caste Yadav (daughter) 3. Santosh Kumar aged about 16 years, s/o late Ramadhar Yadav caste Yadav (son) 4. Ku. Kamani Devi, aged about 14 years, caste Yadav (daughter) 5. Ku. Dhanehswari, aged about 13 years, caste Yadav, (daughter) (Appellant no. 2 to 5 minor, through natural guardian mother, appellant no.1) (R/o Shaheed Veer Narayan Singh Nagar, ward no. 28, in front of I.T.I., G.E. Road, Bhilai, distt. Durg C.G.) VERSUS Respondents Non-applicants Sri Niwas @ Srinu, s/o Shri Venkateshwarlu, aged about 29 years, caste Telugu, R/o Qrt. No.12/0, Street No. 10, Sector 5, Bhilai Nagar, distt. Durg C.G. Smt. K. Nalini w/o K.H. Rao, aged about ..., caste Telugu, R/o Qrt. No. 6/E, Cross Street no.3, Sector 6, Bhilai Nagar, distt. Durg C.G. Branch Manager, Office, the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. 9/1, South ^A^ Gangotri Supela Bhilai, distt. Durg. Through Divisional Manager, the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd Malviya Nagar, Durg C.G. MISC. APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLESACT.1988. Present: Shri Amrito Das, counsel for the appellants. Shri S.P. Sahu,counsel on behalfofShri K.N. Chaturvedi, counsel for respondent No.3. ORDER (20th June, 2011) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. This is claimants' appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the 12th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Durg (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 29.03.2008, passed in Claim Case No. 136/2007. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.18,84,500/- claimed by the appellants/ claimants, unfortunate widow and children of deceased Ramadhar Yadav by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death on 27.02.2007 on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 21.02.2007, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.2,30,823/- as compensation along with interest @ 5% per annum from the dateof filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. .t}»^-^f'^^ ,^ x. '/^^ ^ ^4 '%^€/: ^-^.^^ 3) Shri Amrito Das, learned counsel for the appellants vehemently argued that the Tribunal has erred in awarding low compensation of Rs.2,30,823/- only. 4) Shri S.P. Sahu, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Shri K.N. Chaturvedi, learned counsel for respondent No.3, the Oriental Insurance Company Limited, on the other hand, supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.2,30,823/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 5) 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 meager amount of compensation, nor a Bonanza. 6) Now we shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.2,30,823/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 7) The claimants cannot have any legitimate grievance about the assessment of the income of the deceased by the Tribunalat Rs.100/- per day and Rs.3,000/- per month as in para 6 of the claim petition it was categorically pleaded that deceased Ramadhar Yadav used to get the wages of Rs.85/- per day and Rs.2,550/- per month. 8) The claimants' dependency also has been rightly assessed by the Tribunal by deducting the usual 1/3rd of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses. "'—^ ^ /^•^^ ^ 3 9) The multiplier of 8 selected by the Tribunal cannot be found fault with as the Tribunal found deceased Ramadhar Yadav to be aged about 59 years and the multiplier of 8 has been prescribed under the Second Schedule under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act for the age group between 55-60 years. 10) The Tribunal has been quite liberal in awarding Rs.23,000/- under other heads. 11) For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any scope for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal either on account of the assessment of the income of the deceased or the claimants' dependency by the Tribunal or the multiplier selected. 12) The appeal filed by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation, therefore, is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed. 13) No order as to costs. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge subbu