IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR fC.G.) APPELLANTS: CLAIMANTS ^> •A ••: ^ •^- .^- ,^Ss RESPONDENTS : NON-CLAIMANTS M.A. fC) ^^ f20Ql ^T^A 1. ^ r 2. 1. Smt. Kavita Sardbr Wd/o late Arun Sardar, aged about 35 years 2. Minor Aseem Sardar S/o late Arun Sardar, aged about 12 years 3. Minor Anamika Sardar, D/o late Arun Sardar, aged about 09 years 4. Devashish Sardar S/o late Arun Sardar Aged about 07 years Appellant No. 2, 3 & 4 are minor through legal guardian appellant No. 1, mother Smt. Kavita Sardar All R/o Village P.V.- 3, Pakhanjur, Thana and Tahsil Pakhanjur, District North Bastar, Kanker (C.G.) Versus Dipankar Kundu S/o C.N. Kundu, aged about 37 years, Occupation vehicle owner, R/o Village Pakhanjur, Tahsil Pakhanjur, District Kanker (C.G.) The New India Insurance Company Limited, Near Jhankar Talkies, Jaipur Road, Jagdalpur, District Bastar (C.G.) Miscellanceous Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1994 r an^r^iT Vi-n'b sv^y sti*ii<ti yl?a V 's'sg "4l*ll<yl<l, afll'y'is, Iqini^y sv^ 'q^ra; I'^^Pt C (Ste^- 2^S7 /°g ••^•200" 11*«tlshflcK ^C^ft' aii^r ?SIIWH|OT SB: HON. SHRI JUSTICE 5-1-2010 Shri Aditya Kliare, Shri Saurabh Shanl None for responden Heard on I.A. No. 1| in fiUng fhe appeal. On due considerati^n have succeeded in expl^ appUcation for condonation of delay t>n, I am satisfied thattiie appellaats (intng the delay caused in filing ftie Therefore, fhe appl is condoned; Heard on admissioi TvVith consent of tl and the iasurance eomp? 1. This is claimants compensation awarded Claims Tribimal (FTC), ^5-2-2008 m Claim i whereuader the clamiar Rs. 1,65,000/- as com rate of 6% per anniim payment. cnl<f[ci<ni "RTR^lf ^ f^1^ <fa)^|< =li3lPOT3II^T N.K. AGARWAL ^dv. for the appellants. )aa,Adv., for the respondent No. 1 though served. 2. |cation is aUowed. Delay m. Sling the t. The appeal is adinitted for hearing. [e leamed counsel for the appellanl ^ny, fhe inatter is heard finally. appeal seeking enhancement of by the Additional Motor Accident Iphanupratappur vide its award dated ^ise No. 67/2007 whereby and Ls have been awarded a total sum. of )ensation alonp with mterest at tfae from the date of appUGation tiH its [^% ^a*\ lC-22 SD^I^I l<-li.+ 3^1 SO^Itft •^^ 's^ -^W\<-\^, ofll'y'is, iti'iKiy 3n^?r 'q^? _.^.S:.C.^±3^£7^ WW(T<l)W<=b "^ 200 fq^T' : 2:. Brief fi deceased veliiele Tam in a blast in< s offt wifh oth4: Trax bearirit bv nexalite^ ^ 3. The clatmants prefer|r. 166 of tlie Motor Vehicles | against fhe owner aad Tribunal on a close scrutirjy appreciation of the ma.fe|rial notional income of ffae de< i.e. Rs. 1,:250/- per monfh. personal expenses, depen< 10,000/- per annum. By i Tribunal has assessed Rs. account of loss of income. 15,000/- towards other he. sum of Rs. 1,65,000/- as < •ibiinal has fm-ther award 'bi<<ld<il"i wreif 4 ft^t <[»i*<i< i? sriiOT sn^i arethat on 16-5-2006, while the retuming in tfae regisfa-ation No. CG Q4/H 3093, |AGt, 1988 claiming compensation Ensurer of the vehicle. Leamed (y of tlie evidence adduced and on pl.aced on record assessed (eased at Rs, 15,000/- per annum |After deducting l/3rd of it towards jlency has been assessed at Rs. ^pplying multiplier of 15, learned 1,50,000/- as compensatidn on awardmg further sum of Rs. i, the Tribunal awarded a total tompensation to fhe claimants for thte .deafh of deceased Art-m Sardar in fhe sald accident. ;d interest@ 6% per annuni from .Ti [^ ^fo^ ^y. V37 ^HC-22 '%..,_ V- 311^1 ^iT Vi-H'h aii^r !n+ii<=b ^^ 4 ^) "S^ «'<l*ll<yl<), a^ilu'is, [qciitfy sn^r Tpra; jr^C^'o^^^?/OJ *111CTI 9)*1|C(> "^ 200 1^5^- 311^1 W<ITW ^lfel 4. Shri Adilya Khare, would submit fhat fhe as monfhly income ouj 3,000/- permonfh. |eamed counsel for the appeflants coirjpensation awarded is on lower side It to have been assessed as Rs. 5. Per contra, Shri S; coiinsel appearing for ths tnipugned award and su just and reasbnable arid tl ^.urabh Sharma, Sanjeev, leamed respondent No. 2 supported fhe laitted fhat the ainount awarded is same deserves to be upheld. 6. I have heard leamedl 7. The Tribunal asses / • deceased at Rs. 15,0001 occurred ia fhe year pronouneement of Divisio^ increase in fhe eost of lividi into consideration the ei ,1988, in fhe corisidered income would be Rs. 300<t ^ anniiin in place of Rs. 1|£ % l/3rd of it towards per^ circiimstances ofthe case), cnl*l[(t1*("l'1 *iWV^ "4^^ iS^^M ^?3)PaiT3TI^T counsel for the parties as also the tsed fhe notional tncome of the |/- per anniim. As fhe accident 2006 and, in view of several Bench of this court and lookuiR to and prices index, aad also takin^ |;ct of Section 163 A(3) of the Act, ^pinion 6f this court, the notional )/- per month aad Rs. 36000/- per i,000/- per aimum. By deductinj sonal expenses in the facts and appropriate inultiplicand would be ]15 C-22 sir^rw h-u* sn^v Sti*1 •Hf^t f/ ^ T°g -ill^W*), snl^is, rqoi'My 3n^?T 'inra? ^\'AC ^•^7/C33 111CTI Shliqi "^ 200 fsre^r' 3T1^T s-witgT y[?a Rs. 24,000/- per annum.. ainount woiild com.e to income. By adding Rs. 15 towards other heads; claim.ants are entifled has awarded Rs. 1,65,0( entifled for afiirfher sum The claiiiiants are also per annum froia fhe date Py applying fhe m.111tiplier of 15, the Rs. 3,60,000/- towaTds loss of ,000/-;as awarded by tlie Tribunal 'total ainburit for which tfae to Rs. 3,75,000/-. TheTribunal '-, fherefore, fhe claimants are |ofRs.'2,10,000/- as com.pensation. for interest at the rate of 6% <|)fapplication. ffae conlies 5. For fhe for.eRQini appellaats/claimaats for allowed in part. The com^ by the Tribunal is 6% per annum from ^ appeUants are entitled fb( along wifh interest @ Q application tfll its paymenf ' 9. TUe respondent No|. granted 3 monfhs' tune fo^ 10. No order as to cbl-tiT<n14iri iffq^if^ 1^T^ <Pn-^i< ^ 3lf=tFT 3TI^?T t'easons, the appeal filed bv fhe -l+ Jl, - . ^ ^rihancement offhe com.pensation is ^ensation ofRs. 1,65,000/- awarded to Rs. 3,75,000/- with mterest @ date of application. Thus ttie a further siim of.Ss. 2,10,000/- % per annmn iroBi the date of 3. from. the respondent No. 3 / the Insurance^ Company is depositing the above amoiiat. :osts. N.K. Agrawa! re [41^ ^f<a<l