Ami~¢2 § :L7Qéb‘ioj @ kE3GH CéURT OF CHH§TT§SGARH AT BELASPUR DN§S§GN EENCH CQRAM: HQN’BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, CJ‘ %$N’ELE Si’§R§ SUN“. KUMAR SINHA, J. Misceiianeow Appeai Ne. £86 0% 2mm LQQneimms 1 Smt. Indrani Upadhayay aged about Ciaiman‘iS 38 years, w/o {ate Sharda Pra$ad ‘ Upadhayay. 2 Ku. Mamta Upadhayay, aged about 14 years, d/o late Shayda Prasad Ugadhayay. 3 Toran Upatiha'yayi aged about 12 years, sfo lat Sharda Prasad Upadhayay. {apneHam No 2 & 3 belng mmor on beh f of thmugh her iegal guardtan mother the appel!ant No H AH the readent cf Vinoba Shave Naaar near Duma Nandlr Kushamur Raipur TehsH and district Raipvh C G vERSUS Suresh Kumar Yadav aged about 32 years s!o Sitaram Yadav through nouse of Bisela! Som Nehru Naaar Poitce Station — City kotwah Raiur Tehsii & district Raipur C.G. Firoz Khan, Slo ibrahim Khan, Moudhapara, Pence Siation —~ Moudhapara, Raipur, Tehsii and district Raipur CG. 3 The United india insurance Company Limited, through Divisional Manager the United india insurance Company Limited Amar Compiex Jeevan Beema Marg, Raipur Teneii & Dietrict Raipur C G Reepandems Non — Claimante “ e A§3péai uniiaar Sectian 1?? of the Motor wehicies Act Present: Shri ShiVendu Pandya, counsel forthe appeliants. ‘ Shri GS. Patei, counse§ on behalf of Shri Abhishek Sinha, counsel fer {espendent No.3. QR§ER W“ ¥abmary, 2m 1 ; The fenowing ordgr of the Court was passed by r E Rajeev Gupaa: SJ. The Lmfortunats widcw and minor children of deceases Sharada Prasad Upacihayay are the appellants before us in this appeal fer enhancemenl of the compensation awarded by the ltllb‘Additional Motor Acciden: Claims Tribunal, Raipur (far short ‘the Tribunal’) vide award dated 26.02.2005, passed ln Claim Case Nol§6/2QG4. 2) As againsl the compensation of Rs.16,74_,000/— claimed by ihe appellantsf claimants, unfortunate widow and minor chlidren of deoeaeed Sharada Prasad Upadhayay, by filing a ciaim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 24.04.2002, the Tribunal awarded a total eum of Rs.5;67,640/- ae compensation along with interest ~@ 6% per annuin from the date of fiilng 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 Sharada Prasad Upadhayay died on aocount of the injuries eustained by him in the motor accident on a 24.042002; the accideni occurred {iue to rash and negXigent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Jeep bearing registration No.C.G.04—ZA-2094; as the above offending vehicle Jeep on the date of the accideni was insured with the United indie insurance Company Limited and the insurance Company couid not estabiish any breach of the poiicy conditions‘ the insurance {Dompany was iiabie to pay compensation to the oiaimants. 4) Ae the reseondente have riot fiied 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.4,380/- per month. By deducting H3 of Rs.4,3&Qf— towards the ‘persortat expenees of the deceased, the oiairnants’ dependency was aeeessed at Rs.2,92Q/- per month and Rs.35,040l- per annum. By multiplying the annuai dependency of Re.35,040/— with the muttipiier of 16, the compensation was worked out to Rs.5,60,640l-. By awarding further sum of Rs.7,000/— under other heads, the Tribunal awarded a‘ total sum of Rs.5,67,640/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Sharada Prasad Upadhayay in the motor accident. ‘ The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.5;67;640l- @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition tiit the date of actuat payment. 6) Shri Shtvendu Pandya; learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribunai has erred in assessing the a compenSation on the basis of the basic-pay of the deceased and ignoring the amount of dearness anowance which he was getting atong with his saiary; and in awarding low compensation of R$t5167i640b only. 7') Shri GAS. Patei, teamed couneel on behalf of Shri Abhishek Sinha, learned counsel for respondent No.3, the United india insurance. Company Limited, on the ether hand, supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.5,67,640/— awarded by the Tribunai is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present oase‘ 8} Deceased Sharda Prasad Upadhyay was aged about 39 years on the date of the accident. At the retevant time he was working as Conetabie in the Police Department. The claimants adduced in evidence the eaiary certificate EXP/1. The salary certificate EXP/1 reveals that deceased Sharda Praead Upadhyay received baeic-pay of Rs.4;380/- and deamees aliowance of Re.i.883/— in the month of March 2092. The Tribunai apparently has fallen into error in asseSsing the compensation on the basie of the ’oaoic-pay of Rer4;380/— per month alone; We; therefore, propose to recompute the compensation taking the monthiy salary of the deceased at Re.6,263/— per month which is rounded—off to Rs.6,300/— per month. 9} .By deducting the usual 1.,I'3rd of Rs;6,800/-‘towarde the personai expenses of the deceased, the claimants’ dependency is assessed at Rs.4,200/— per month and Rs.50,400/— per annum. 10) As deceased Sharda Prasad Upadhyay was 39 years of age on the date of the accident, the appropriate muttiplier in the case wouid be 15 in View of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Saria \ierma {Smt} amt Qthers Versue $elhi Transport Serperation em another; reported in §ZG§9§ $ SCC 121] wherein muitiptier of i5 has been prescribed for the age group between 36-40 years. 11) By multiplying the annuai dependency of Rs.50,400/- with the muttipiier of 15 the compensation works out to Rs.7,56,0DO/—. The ciaimants are further entitled to receive Rs.5,000/— towards funeral expenses; Rs.5,000/— for loss of estate and Rs.5,000f— for loss of consortium to the widow. The claimants, thus, become entitied to receive a total sum of Rs.7,7‘l ,OOOI— as compensation for the death of deceased Sharda Prasad Upadhyay in the motor accident. 12) Learned counsel for the parties submitted that with a View to avoid any possible dispute between the parties 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 appeai itself. t3} Considering ali the reievant aspects of the matter, including the deiay in disposal of the claim petition; and the present appeal and the fact that the insurance Company atone is not to be blamed for the-entire delay in the matter, we quantify the amodht of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.2;03,360!- at R821 .640!~. 14) For the foregoing reasons, the appea! filed by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation is aHowed in part. The compensation of Rs.5,67,640/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to R3171 ,ODOI— with funher quantified amount of interest of Rs.2’t,640/— on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs_2,03,3601—. 15) Respondent No.3 the United lndia insurance Company Limited is granted'three months’ time for depositing the total sum of Rs.2,2S,OOD/- (Rs.2,Q3,360/- towards enhanced amount of compensation + R521 .,640fm towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.2,G3,360/—) before the concerning Claims Tribunal. subbu 16) ’ No order as to coets. l I i Sdl- V .Sttl’" { a c i" SunitKumar Sinha \ Chief Jusu‘ce 1’ Judge f Judge