x HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT B!LASPU ‘ D!\I!S!ON BENCH v QRAM: HON’BLE SHR! RAJEEV GUPTA, CJ. & HON’ELE SHR! RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J. Misc. Apgeal No. 281 of 2904: 1 Aamna Begum @ Kewra Bai, w!o Late Elahi Baksh, aged 40‘years. ’Noorbaksh, s/o late Eiahi Baksh, aged 24 years‘ Ku. Sanu Bai, d/o‘!ate Elahi Baksh, aged 181’years are rfo Wam No.17, Subhash Nagar, near Santoshi Mandir, Mahasamund, distt. Mahasamund, CG. , apneiiants Nén—appiicants Nb.4(a) to 4(c)' «*.‘ 2 J i L \ { ) i [ I Ressondents Applicants No.1 to ! i i g i '3 r VERSUS Smt. Haseena Begum, W/o ‘ate EEahi Baksh @ Manihar aged 5O year's, r/o Handipara, Shiv Nagar, Police Station Azad Chowk, Raipur, Chhattisgwh. Tasawwar Khan, s/o Bahadur Khan, r/o Briadawan ’ Campiex, Madahapara! Raipur. ' (Driver of Jeep No. MP. 23 TM 1511; new number C.G. 04 ZA/2465) Shakli Khan slo Rasid Khan, rio, Medahapara, Raipur, C.G. (Registered owner of vehicie ‘Jeen No. MP. 23 T/1151, new number C.G. O4 ZA/2465)‘ " Natienal insurance Company Limited, Branch Office, GE. Road, Raipur, CG. ‘ {Ineurer of vehicie Jeep No. MP. 23 T11151, new number C.G. O4 ZA/2 65) Miecelianeous AQQeai u/S ’173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 ‘ R C 3 Present : Shn P Dutta counselforthe appeiiants ' 1 ‘ Shn None A for L respondents Smgraul counsel No 2 for & 3 respondent Np 1 Shn Goutam Khetrapai counsei for respondent No 4 ‘ ORDER > (08m November, 20w) 1 The fonowing‘ order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta; CJ; y . The appeliants who were non-aopiioants 4(a) 4(b) and 4(Q) before the Tnbunal are seeking enhancement of the, r compensation awarded by the First Addrtronal Motor Acoldent i Ciaims Tribunal, Raipur (for short, ‘the Tribunal’) vide award Erda‘ted 03.12.2003, passed in Ciaim Case No.37 of 2003. 2)’ Respondent No.1 Smt. Haseena Begum, widow. of Edeoeased Etahi Baksh @ Manihar claimed compensation of_ Rs.4,50,000/- by filing a claim petition under Section 163-A of the lMotor Vehicles Actpfor his death in the motor-accidentpon :0401 .2003. :8) During the pendency of the claim petition, appeliants Aamna Begum @ Kewra Bat, Noorbaksh and Ku. Shanu Bat were impleaded as non-applicants 4(a). 4(b) and 4(6) on their application vide Tribunal’s order dated 1040-2003.. Appellant Aamna Begum @ Kewra Bar claimed that she was also Widow of deceased Elahi Baksh @ lvianihar and Noorbaksh and Ku Shanu Batvwere eon and daughter of the deceased. r ’ 7 r ‘i"*'“ ’r‘a’ grits-’1‘”: "“J 1 @ 4? The 'Tribuna! on a close scruiiny of the entii’e evidence ied bl£fore it held‘that deceased Elahi Baksh @ Manihar died on 1 _ . atcodnt of the Nudes sustained by him in the motor accident on O .O1I.2003;'the accident occurred due to rash and negiigent diving of the driver of the offending vehicle Jeep bearing registration No. M.P.23-Tl1151;'as the above offending vehicie Jeep on the date of the accident was insured with the National Insurance Company Limited and the Insurance Company could ot establish any breach of the policy conditions the insurance omoanv was liable to may compensation to the claimants laimant Smt Haseena Begum and non applicant Aamna Begum @ Kewra Bai both being widows of deceased Elahi Baksh @ V5 a!“ o V a“ Hg. +Aanihar were entitled to get equal share from the amount of c‘ 15) ' The Tribunai assessed the income of the deceased at t . ompensation assessed and awarded by the Tribunai rs 1GOf- per day and Rs.2,500/— per month assuming that the deceased was getting work only for 25 days in a month. Q'By deducting 1/3“ of Rs.2,500l— towards the personal expenses oi“ the deceased, the claimants’ dependency was assessed at xRs.1 ,667l- per'month and Rs.20,0D4/— per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rsi20,'004/— with the multiplier of 8, the compensation was worked out to Rst 60 O32/- By awarding further sum of Rs 2 OOOI- towards funeral expenses the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1‘,62_,032/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Elahi Baksh @ Manihar in l i i‘ ithe motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of R84 ,62,032/— @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition tiii the date of aettia! payment. The Tribunal directed that claimant Smt. Haseena Begum and non—applicant Aamna Begum @ Kewra Bai were entitled to get equai share of R381 ,016I- and the prorafa amount of intereet. 6‘3 Shri’Pr Dutta, learned counsel for the appellants submitted l :that the Tribunat has erred in seiecting the lower multiplier of 8\ l r Eand in not awarding any sum towards loss of estate and loss of l roonsortium to the widows and in awarding onty Rst2,000f- l {towards funeral expenses. r l l i l l i - x o 7) Shri Goutam Khetrapai, learned counset for respondent eNo‘.4 the National insurance Company Limited, on the other hand, supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.1,62,032/— awarded by the Tribunat is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present cased g a) Shri A.L. Singraul, iearned counsei for respondent No.1 Smt. Haseena Begum (claimant) the other widow of deceaSed Etahi Baksh @ Manihar supported the submissions advanced on behalf of the appellants. 9) in a motor accident claim case, What is important is that, thd Compensation to heawarded by the Courts/Tribunals should be just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances l r i l r r { It Should neither be a meager ~am0unt of Qémpensation nora Bonanza 1 l I ()1) Now we shall examine as-to Whether the compensafion of of? the case. ‘ i ! R 162,032”- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper o mpensatlon m the facts and Circumstances of the present case / i he appeiiants and resoondent [\o 1 Smt Haseena Begum a we o nnot have any iegltimate grievance so far as the assessment of i i the income of the deceased by the Tribunal at Rs iGOl— per day nd Q 2500/- per month is concerned as they themselves Dieaded that the deceased used to earn Rs 100l- per day. l 12g3 The otaimants' dependency also has been rightly assessed i i by the Tribunal by deducting the usual 1/3“” of the income of the l deceased towards his personal expenses. l l 18) The multiplier of 8 selected by the Tribunal is certainly on this lower side considering that deceased Elahi Baksh @ Manihar Mas shown to be 60 years of age in his postmortem report. l 1:4) ln our opinion, multiplier of 9 would be appropriate in th‘e ptesent case in View of‘the recent dictum of the Apex Court in the case of sarla \lerma (Smt) and Others Versus Delhi Transport l i l corporation and another reported In (2&09) 6 SCC 121 herein multiplier of 9 has been prescribed for the age drcup b tween 56 60 years ) By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs 2O 004l- With tiite multiplier of 9, the compensation works out to Rs.1 ,80.0o6/-. l he claimants are further entitled to receive Rs.5,000/- towards fdneral expenses; Rs.5,000l— for loss of estate; and RS‘SDOOI— for i053 of consortium to two widows. The claimants, thus, become erwstitled to receive a total sum of Rs.1 ,95,036f— as compensation for the death of deceased Eiahi Baksh @ Manihar in the motor a ecident. 1%) A further sum of Rs.2,996l— is awarded to the claimants as quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of corrip‘ensation of Rs.33,004/—. 1?i) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal hled by the appellants is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs.1 ,62,032/— . l a\;ivarded by the Tribunai is enhanced to Rs.1 ,95,036/— with further qt‘tantified amount of interest of Rs.2,996/— on the enhanced r. t ahwount of compensation of Rs.33,004/-. “8) Respondent No.4 the National Insurance Company Limited i granted three months’ time for depositing the total sum of 'as.:36,000/— (Rs.33,004f- towards enhanced amount of c‘pmpensation + Rs.2,996f— towards quantified amount of interest o§n the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.33,004/-) before i l trite concerning Claims Tribunal. 1E9) The above amount of Rs.36,000/- shallbe apportioned in t e equal share of Rsl18,000/- each to appeiiant No.1 Aamna egum @ Kewra Bai and respondent No.1 Smt. Haseena egpm, two widows of deceased Eiahi Baksh @ Manihar. 20 No order as to costs. ‘ i u i Sdl- \ . j ‘ ”‘ u ...... f‘ 1‘77 3 Sdl- . g’i‘5\ R.N.Chandrakar i Chief Justice} \ . » Judge