<^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR fC.G.) M.A. fC) N04^9 / 2009 SSI011 APPELLANT RESPONDENTS : National Insurance Company, Through: Branch Manager, National Insurance Company Limited, Firdaus .Chamber, Ramdas Street, Verdha Road, Nagpur (Maharastra) Through : Divisional Manager, National Insurance Company Limited, Akash Ganga Campus, Supeia, Bhilai, Tahsil and District Durg (C.G.) VERSUS :1. Smt. Mamta Devi, Wd/o. Late Vijay -" ^ Kumar, aged about 29 years, 2.. Neeraj Kumar, S/o. Late Vijay Kumar, ""^ aged about 7 years, Minor, Through : Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Mamta De.vi \ ">v^ ^.•^'/t^* 3-. Harendra Prasad, S/o. Late Rampreet, <>?" '.^. A.U)''* \ aged about 65 years, ..--s^y7 ^"^^.^ ^y.'.-•••"" ^^A.-'''' 4. ^ ^ ^ ^ x,..""'' Smt. Fulsundari Devi, W/o. Shri l-1arendra Prasad, aged about 61 years, All R/o. House No.362, Pragati Street, Near Soni Flour Mill, Hanuman Mandir Road, Supela, Bhilai, Tahsil and District Durg (C.G.) (CLAIMANTS) 7J Ahmad Ali, S/o. Mumtaj Ali, R/o. Hasan Bag Nandan Ban Layout Nagpur (M.H.) (DRIVER) Asfaque Ali, S/o. Mumtaj Ali, aged about 30 years, R/o. Badi Maszid Hasan Bag Nagpur(M.H.) (OWNER) AWARD AMOUNT VALUATION OF PRESENT APPEAL Rs.5,94,500/- Rs.5,94,500/- ....__._,__:._....J- ^_ MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL U/S. J73 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLE ACT. 1988 .y^. ^ ^ HIGHCOURT^FCHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR APPELLANT M.A. (ONo.1493 of 2009 National Insurance Company VERSUS RESPONDENTS : Smt. Mamta Devi & Others APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT DB: Hon'bte Shri Justice I.M. Quddusi & Hon'ble Shri Justice N. K. Agarwal. Present : Shri Gautam Khetrapal, Advocate for the appellant. Shri BP Singh, Advocate for the respondent No. 1 to 4. ORAL ORDER (Passedon 4.10.2010) Per: I.M. Quddusj, J. 1. The claimants have also preferred an appeal against the award impugned for enhancement of compensation. The same was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to prefer cross objection in the instant appeal. Admittedly, the claimants are not intended to prefer any cross objection. 2. Heard 3. The instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the award dated 20.07.2009, passed by the VIllth Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (FTC), Durg (for short 'the Tribunal') in claim case No. 121/08, awarding Rs. 5,94,500/- to the claimants. The award has been challenged on the basis of quantum on the ground that the income of the deceased was not assessed correctly. '5 n^ 4. Brief facts of the case as per claimants are that, on 16.05.2008 Vijay Kumar (since deceased) while going towards Basant Talkies, Bhilai, by his Motorcycle, the Driver of Matador (Swaraj Mazda) bearing registration MH-29-7506, dashed him as a result of which he succumbed to the injuries sustained in the said accident. 5. The claimants preferred an applteation before the Tribunal under Section 166 of the Motor Vehides Act, claiming compensation to the tune of Rs. 1,42,88,303/- for the death of deceased in the said accident. 6. The Tribunal, on a close scrutiny of the evidence led by the parties, the material available on the record, and submissions of the parties, awarded Rs. 5,94,500/- to the claimants along with interest @ 6 percent per annum from the date of application till its payment. 7. We have seen the records of Lower Court which shows that the deceased applied for permission to the Industries Department for establishment of Stone Crusher for the capacity of thirty thousand Metric Tonnes on 29.12.2006 which was acknowledged by the General Manager, District Trade and Industries Centre on 29.12.2006 itself (Ex. P-12/C). Further, the deceased purchased the land also for the establishment of the Stone Crusher by the registered deed on 10.11.2006. The covering page of Kisan Book of the deceased Vijay Kumar is endosed as Ex. P-11/C. The cash memos have also been filed showing that (tiaterial was purchased for establishment of "jfl i&^-^:^.^&^ls^;iii%^^tiNi^^^^t'?^5W!li.i ';';^;i(i111^' ^€~%. the Stone Crusherwhich are Ex. P/19, P/20, P/21, P/22, P/23, P/24etc. 8. The deceased was having Electronic material shop and from which it was alleged that he was getting Rs. 7,000/- per month. Taking into consideration the overall circumstances and also that the Stone Crusher was being established by the deceased, his monthly income can be safely held as Rs. 5,000/- per month i.e. Rs. 60.000/- per annum. The Tribunal concerned has gave its finding that the deceased was contributing to his family at Rs. 36.000/- per annum. If we take 1/3rd towards personal expenses of the deceased from his annual income, then the contribution towards the family would be more than Rs. 36,000/- per annum i.e. the amount assessed by the Tribunal. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we do not find any illegality or any good ground to interfere with the award passed by the Tribunal. Accordingly, the appeal deserves to be and is hereby dismissed. No order asto costs. Sd/- LM.Quddusi Judge -Sd/- N.K. Agrawal Judge Sahu