(^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J. Appellants Claimants Misc. Appeal (Cl No.1004 of 2007 1. Gajendra Kumar Patel S/o Late Shivram Patel, aged about 21 years. 2. Narendra Kumar Patel, aged 19 years S/o Late Shiv Ram Patel Both R/o Govindpur, Tahsil Kanker Distt. North Baster Kanker. Resoondents Driver Owner Insurer Owner Insurer VERSUS 1. Sanjay Karmkar, S/o Ranjit Karmkar aged about 28 year, R/o 79 area, Bande, Tahsil Pakhanjur Distt. North Baster Kanker(C.G.) 2. M/s Kanker Road Lines, Civil Line, Raipur Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 3. The New India Insurance Co. Ltd. Divisional Office, Madina Building, Katchahri Chowk, Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 4. Santram Sahy S/o Ratiram Sahu aged about 35 years, R/o Makadi Tahsil Kanker, Distt. North Baster Kanker(C.G.) 5. National Insurance Co. Ltd. Upper to Central Bank, Near R.R.S. Officer, Jagdalpur, Distt. Bastar (C.G.) Memo of appeaLynder Section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act 'c<SI»i '^••, 'i'^--siy "^ A.C.No. 1004of 2007 Present: Shri D.N. Prajapati and Shri Mohd. Tariq Haider, counsel for the appellants. Shri Shreekumar Agrawal, Senior Counsel with Shri Anand Gupta, counsel for respondent No.3. Shri Yogesh Chandra, counsel for respondent No.4. Shri Raj Awasthi, counsel for respondent No.5. ORDER ith (14InDecember,2011) The fotlowing order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. This is claimants' appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kanker (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 26.06.2007, passed in Claim Case No. 13/2007. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.6,88,000/- claimed by the appeltants/ claimants, unfortunate sons of deceased Smt. Lalita Patel, by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for her death in the motor accident on 29.10.2006, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,59,500/- as compensation along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 3) The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held that deceased Smt. Lalita Patel died on account of the injuries sustained by her in the motor accident on 29.10.2006; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Bus bearing registration KN'" "3<"'»'' "'%. tj :y s A.C.No.1004of 2007 No.C.G.-04/E-1233; as the above offending vehicle Bus, on the date of the accident, was insured with the New India Insyrance 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 the Tribunal have now attained finality. 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 Vehicles Act. By deducting 1/3rd of Rs.15,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the daimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.10,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.10,000/- with the multiplier of 15, the compensation was worked out to Rs.1,50,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.9,500/- under other heads, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,59,500/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of their mother Smt. Lalita Patel in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.1,59,500/- @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri D.N. Prajapati and Shri Mohd. Tariq Haider, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the claimants' evidence about the income of the .^^r^ (6^\ 1»,:!v! M.A.C. No. 1004 of 2007 deceased and in assessing her income at Rs.15,000/- per annum only; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.1,59.500/- only. 7) Shri Shreekumar Agrawal, learned Senior Counsel with Shri Anand Gupta, learned counsel for respondent No.3, the New India Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Bus, on the other hand, supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.1,59,500/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 8) Shri Raj Awasthi, learned counsel for respondent No.5, National Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the other vehicle Jeep in which deceased Smt. Lalita Patel was travelling and Shri Yogesh Chandra, learned counsel for respondent No.4 Santram Sahu, the owner ofthe Jeep, also supported the award. 9) !n 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, nora Bonanza. 10) Now we shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.1,59,500/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 11) True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Smt. Lalita Patel used to earn Rs.100/- per day and Rs.3,000/- per month by selling vegetables, no cogent and reliable evidence was led before the Tribunal for establishing the above occupation of the deceased :<s^' s^.^ ^i g^ ':/ .^ -f M.A.C.No. 1004of 2007 •b and her income to the extent of Rs.3,000/- per month. In this state of evidence, we do not find any fault in the approach of the Tribunal in discarding the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased. 12) Nevertheless, the income of the deceased assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.15,000/- per annum in the year 2006 is certainly on the lower side and requires reconsideration. 13) Considering that deceased Smt. Lalita Patel was aged about 40 years on the date of the accident, we are of the opinion that she could have easily earned Rs.65-70/- per day even by working as an unskilled labour in theyear 2006. We, therefore, propose to re-compute the compensation taking the income of the deceased at Rs.2,000/- per month and Rs.24,000/- per annum. 14) By deducting the usual 1/3rd of Rs.24,000/- towards the personal expenses ofthe deceased, the claimants' dependency is assessedat Rs.16,000/- per annum. 15) Considering the age of the deceased; the claimants; and the other relevant factors of the present case, we are of the opinion that multiplier of 14 would be appropriate in the present case. 16) By multiplying the annual cjependency of Rs.16,000/- with the multiplier of 14 the compensation works out to Rs.2,24,000/-. The claimants are further entitled to receive Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.5,000/- for loss of estate. The daimants, thus, become entitled to receive a total sum of I.A.C.No. 1004of 2007 Rs.2,34,000/- as compensation for the death of their mother Smt. Lalita Patel in the motor accident. 17) Learned counsel for the parties submitted that with a view to avoid any possible dispute between the parties before the Tribunal about the period for which the claimants are entitled to receive interest on the enhanced amount of compensation, the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation may be quantified in this appeal itself. 18) Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter including the delay in disposal of the claim petition and the present appeal and the fact that the Insurance Company alone is not to be blamed for the entire delay in the matter, we quantify the amount of interest on ' the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.74,500/- at Rs.7,500/-. 19) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs.1,59,5007- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.2,34,000/- with further quantified amount of interest of Rs.7,500/- on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.74,500/-. 20) Respondent No.3 the New India Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.82,000/- (Rupees eighty-two thousand only) (Rs.74,500/- towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.7,500/- towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of subbu M.A.C.No. 1004of 2007 compensation of Rs.74,500/-) before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 21) No order as to costs. Sd/- ChiefJustice SA'- R.N. Chandrakar Judge