•^'. HON'BLE Sl ;!aimants 1. Smt. Saroj Sharma, aged late Suresh Sharma. Goverdhan .CS.1 2. Ku. Shweta Sharma, aged 22 yrs. 3. Ku. Sheeta! Sharma, aged 21 yrs. 4. Ku. Padrha Sharma, aaed 19 vrs. 5. Ku. RiSika Sharma, aged 16 yrs. 6. Ku. Nikita Sharma, aged 10 yrs. Alt dauahters of late Suresh Sharma & No.5 and 6 are minors and are represented by naturai guardian mother appeliant No.1 Saroj Sharma, w/o late Suresh Sharma, ali resident of Station Road, Raipur. >^i;^-,.-,A, i'Mon-appiicanis •/^ Gurbhej Singh, S/o Shri Gurmukh Singh Multhani, aged 49 yrs, R/o Temanaka, P.S. Panchpawli, distt. Nagpur, M.S. Driver. Harmitsingh, S/o Shri Awtar Singh Multani, aged 38 years, R/o Baba iudhaji Nagar, H.No. 189, Nagpur; P.S. Panchpawli, distt. Nagpur, M.S.j (Owner of Vehicls) The Orientai Insurance Company Limited, 10-Ramdas Path, Wardha Road, Nagpur, through its Manager. r^- '^t;i,^ ^ 'lf'^^' Present: Shri Kshitij Sharma, counsel for the appellants. Shri A.K. Athaley, counsel for respondent No.3. sth The foiiowina order of the Court was This is claimants' appea! for enhancement of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur (for short, 'fhe Tribunal') vide award dated 10.02.2003, passed in Claim Case No.25 of 2001. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.34,00,000/- claimed by the appeilants/ ciaimants, unfortunate vvidow and daughters of deceased Goverdhan Lal @ Suresh S.harma, by filing a ciaim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor acctdent on 17.03.2001, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,30,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. ,, 3) The Tribunal on a ciose scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held that deceased Goverdhan Lal @ Suresh Sharma died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor acoident on 17.03.2001; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Truck bearin( registration No. C.G. 04/6465; as the above offending vshiole Truck ,'^s^ on the date of the accident was insured with the Orientai Insurance Company Limited and the insurance Company could not establish any breach of the policy conditions, the insurance Company was liable to pay compensatlon to the claimants. 4) .As the respondents have not fiied any appea! against the award, the above findings recorded by the Tribuna! have now attained finality. 5) The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- per annum on the basis of the notiona! income prescribed in the Second Schedule under Section 163-A of the MoSor Vehicles Act. By deducting 1 /3rd of Rs. 1 5.000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.10,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.10,000/- with the muitiplier of 13, the compensation was worked out to Rs.1,30,000/-. The Tribunal, thus, av/arded a total sumof Rs.1,30,000/- as compensation toithe claimants for the death of deceased Go'/erdhan Lal @ Syresh Sharma in the motor accident. The Tribunai further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.1,30,000/- @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition tiii the date of actual payment. | i 6) Shri Kshitij Sharma; learned counsei for the appellants submitted that the Tribuna! has erred in not accepting :the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased aiad in assessing his income at Rs.15,000/- per annum only; in not I.' 'ii il^^^ f % 1]. J Jr ''•t...; ^'''fr^y awarding any sum towards funeral expenses, loss of estate and loss of consortium to the widow; and in awardina low compensation ofRs.1,30,000/-only. 7) Shri A.K. Athatey, 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.1,30,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. s) In a motor accident claim case, what is important is that, the compensation to be awarded by the Courts/Trjbunals should be just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the case. !t should neither be a meager amount of compensation, nor a Bonanza. 9) Now we shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.1,30,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts andcircumstances ofthe present case. 10) True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Goverdhan La! @ Suresh Sharma used to eam Rs.10,500/- per month,Jn the evidence before the Tribunal the income of the deceased was stated to the extent of Rs.20,000/- per month. The claimants miserably faiied in adducing any clinching and reliable evidence before the Tribunal to establish the income of the deceased :to that extent. We, therefore, do not flnd any fault in the approach of the Tribunal in discarding the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased. '^ rl';-«£Ssrfli' 11) Nevertheless, the inc-ome of the deceased assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.15,000/- per annum in the year 2001 is certainly on the lower side and requires reconsideration. 12) Considering that deceased Goverdhan Lai @ Suresh Sharma was aged about 48-49 years on the date of the accident and there is some documentary evidence to establish that the deceased was carrying on some sort of business, we are of the opinion that the Tribunai ought to have assessed his annual income at Rs.30,000/- per annum. We, therefors, propose to recompute t'ne compensation taking the income ofthe deceased at is.yu,oou/- per annum. 13) By deducting the usua! 1/3rd of Rs.30,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency is assessed at Rs.20,000/- per annum. 14) The multiplier of 13 selected by the Tribunal considering the fact that deceased Goverdhan Lal © Suresh Sharma was aged about 48-49 years is appropriate in vievrf ofthe recent dictum ofthe Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt) and Others.Versus telhj Transport Corporation and another, reported in (2009) iCC 121, wherein muitiplier of 13 has been prescribed for the age group between 46-50 years. 15) By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.20,000/- with the multiplier of 13, the compensatlon works out to Rs.2,60,000/-. claimants are further entitled to receive Rs.5,0007- towards fynera expenses; Rs.5,000/- for loss of estate; and Rs.5,000/- for loss of The •W^WSM^T.^SSSSiS ^) •'••, i -L1 consortium to the widow. The claimants, thus, become entitled to receive a total sum of Rs.2,75,000/- as compensation for the death deceased Goverdhan Lal 0) Suresh Sharma in the motor 16) Learned coi.inse! for the parties submitted that with a view to avoid any possibie dispute between the parties about the period for which the claimsnts are entitled to recelve intsrest on the enhanced amount of compensation, the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation may be quantified in this appeai itself. 17) Considering all the relevant aspects ofthe 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.1,45,( Rs.15,000/- 18) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation is aliowed in part. The compensation of Rs.1,30,000/- avvarded by the Tribunal js ] enhanced to Rs.2,75,000/- with further quantified amount oflinterest of Rs.15,000/- on the enhanced amount of compensation |of | Rs.1,45,000/-. . • ! ' J 19) Respondent No.3- the Oriental Insurance Companyj Limitgd are granted three months' time for depositing the total|sumlof Rs.1,60,000/- (Rs.1,45.000/- towards enhanced ampunt |of compensation + Rs.15,000/- towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensatlon of Rs.1,45,000/-) before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 20) No order as to costs. ; sd/- Chief Jusdce Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge subbu