\^ HIQH CQURTQF CHHATriSGARH: BILASPUR Single Bench: Hon'bte Shri Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh, <1. Appellants Claimants Respondents I.A.C.No.1063 of 2007 1. Sumitra Bai, Widow of Late Shri Sadhuram Satnami, aged about 36 years; 2. Maheshwari, D/o Late Shri Sadhuram Satnami, aged about 17 years, Minor, through her natural guardian Mother Sumitra Bai, Widow of Late Shri Sadhuram Satnmai; 3. Sham Bai, widow of Late Shri Rungu Satnami, aged about 65 years; Al] are resident of Village Hasda, Post Hasda, Tahsil and Polioe Station Beria, District Durg (CG) : Versus ' 1. Mukesh, Son of Shri Gin/ar Prasad Verma, aged about 25 years, resident of Village Kharra, Post Kusmi, Tahsil and Police Station Berla, District Durg (CG) (Driver) 2. Rajesh Verma, Son of Shri Dwarika Prasad Venna, aged about 35 years, Resident of Bhath, Police Station Kharora, District Raipur (CG) presently residing at Village Pirda, Post Bhimbhauri, Tahsil and Police Station Beria, District Durg (CG) (Ownerofthe vehicle) 3. The National Insurance Company Limited, Bhilai (CG) Menro^f aRpeaI ynder Section 173 of the MotorVehicle Act, Present: Shri S.P. Sahu, counsel for the appellants. . ORAL ORDER (Passed on 05.12.2008) l-1eard on admission. (2) This is an appeal by the claimants for enhancement of compensation of Rs.3,95,500/- awarded by the Additionai Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (henceforth the 'Tribunal'), Bemetara, Distt. Durg (CG) in claims case No.89/2006 by aw'ard dated 30.06.2007. ^' Gor><tc< ^ Ba &- \r (3) The sole ground urged by the learned counsel for the appetlants in this appeal is that the Tribunal ought to have taken the daily wages of the deceased at Rs.150/- instead of Rs.100/-. (4) Having oonsidered the submissions of the learned counsel for the appellants, I have perused the impugned award. No documentary evidence v/as adduced by the claimants relating to the wages earned by the deceased even though the deoeased wasworking in a private company. Therefore, the Tribunal was justified in taking the monthly inoome of the deceased at Rs.3,000/- and assessing loss of dependency at Rs.3,84,000/-. So far as the amount of Rs.11,500/- awarded by the Tribunal under other conventional heads and the multiplier applied is concerned, they are not in dispute. In this view of the matter, 1 am of the considered opinion that the oompensation of Rs.3,95,500/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable compensation. The appeal. being devoid of merit is dismissed at the stage of admission. J' Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh Judge