JiwiR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILA$§3UR WVISIGN BENCH CURAM. HgwBLE ShRl RIENEEV GUPTA C J F“? gLE 39R! RANG'\§ATH ”HANBRAKAR J Ni §x {$} No 5$ of 2092 x Appeiiants 1. Smt. Phoo! Kumari Devi, CEaimants ’ Aged abaut 25 years, \I‘a’x’o. Late Nathuni V . Yadav, Gccupation - House mid iady. 2‘ Sonu, aged about 7 years, S/o. Laie Nathum Yadav. 3. Ku. Rekha, aged about 5 years, D/o. Late Nathuné Yadav 4. Smt. LalMunni Sevi: aged about 55 yeai's‘, W/o. Munnila! Yadav 5. Munniiai Yadav, aged about 6O years, 3/0. Jagdev Yadav Minor Appellant No. 2 & 3 through Iega§ guamian appeHant No.1 Phoo: Kumar Devi AH are Rio. Sondongri, Raipur, Tahsil & Distt. Raépur (C.G.) Versus Resnondents 1. V. Surya Rao @ Suryanarayan, aged PJon-appEicarits about 45 year , Sfo. Rama Naidu, Occunation — Driver 2 Smt. Arisetti Ramadevr. W/o. Ashok Kurnar Gupta, Occupation — Truck Owner. Both are R/o. Raipur Madras Transport, Bhanpuri, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 3. The Oriental insurance Co Ltd :hough Dwisronai Manager DMSionai Office Kutchhery Chowir Jail Road Raieur (C.G.) 2 @ M§$6e§§amous Aimea ui$i73 cf the Motm Vehiems Act. 1933 Fresem : Shri S.C.Verma, ccunseif‘orthe apgaeliants. \ Shri A.K.Atha%ey, saunas: far responder}? No.3. GRDER §i$m Mgrghg 2M9} The foiiowing omfer 0f the Cam was passed by a x ‘ Rakev Gum‘a, CJ. Thjs is ciaiman?s’ appeal for enhancement ef the compensation awarded by the Motor Accidem Claime Tribune}, Raipur, (fer short ‘Ehe Tribunal’) vide award dated 26.D§.20G1, passed §n Ciaim Case No.47xi19'98. 2) As against me compensat§on of Rs.1D.SO,GOO/- ciaimed bv ihe appellants/claimants, unfortunate widow. minor c'hiidren and parents of deceased Nathuni Yadav,- by fi£ing a claim petition under $ee‘iion 165 of the Moto.’ Vehieies Act, for his death in the motor accident on 04.64.19Q8; the Tribunal awarded a iotai sum of Rs.1,92;OGO/- as compensation along with interest @ 9% per annurn from the dais of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual pavrnent. 3 The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence ted before it hetd that deceased Natnuni Yadav died on account of the inguries sustained by him in the motor accident on (34.64.1998; the accident occurred due to rash and negfigent driving of the drtver of the offending vehicle Truck; as the offending vehicle Truck on the x a date of the accident was insured wzth the Oriental 'ineurance Company Limited: the insurance Company was iiapie t0 pay compensation to the ciaimants. 4) As the respondents have not fiied any appeai against the awanj, ihe above findings {ecorded by ine Tnbunai have now attained finality. 5') The Tribunai assessed the income of the deceased at Rsi5CIOI- per month and RsiaOODI- per annum. By deducting 1.!3r" of Rs.18,0001— towards ”the personai expenses ef ihe deceased, the ciaimantsi dependency was assessed at Rsi ZDGGI- per annum. By mul‘iipiying the annuai dependency of Rs.i2,G00l- with the muitipiier of 16; the, compensation was worked out to Red ,§2,0GG/-. The Tribunai, thus, awarded a sum of Rs.1 ,92,DGG/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Nathuni Yadav in the motor aceident. The Tribune! further directed payment of- interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.t,§2,0t‘)0f- @ 9% per annurn from the date of the filing of the claim petition tiii the date of actuai payment. 6) Shri 3C. Verma, learned counsel for the appeilants submitted that the Tribunat has erred in not accepting the claimants’ evidence about the income of the deceased and in assessing his income at Rst ,5DDI— per month and Rs.18,00@f— per annum oniy; in seiecting the tower multipiier of 16; in not awarding any sum under other permissibie heads; and in awarding tow compensation of Rsi ,92DGGI— oniy. @ 7) Shri AK. Athaley, iearned counsei fcx respondent No.3 The Oriemai Insurance Company Limited, on the other h§nd supported the award and contended that the Tribune! has been quite iibera} in awarding substentiai amount of Rs.1,92,00Q/- ae compensation to the Ciaimante. 8) True, the oiaimants pieaded that deceased Nathuna Yadav used io eam RS25OGI- per month by running a canteen in Urta tndustriat area. the evidence ted in that behaif was not of ciinchino nature. No documentary evidence was produced before the a Tribunai to establish that the deceased was running any canteeh at ati. in this state of evidence: we do not find any fautt in the aonroach of the Tribunai in discarding the ciaimants’ evidence about the income of the deceased. Q) Nevertheiess, the income of the deceased assessed by the ’Tt’ibunai at Rs.1,SOO/— per month and Rs.18,©00/- per annurn is certainiv on the lower side and requires reconsideration. it?) Taking into consideration the age of the deceased and other reievant factors: we are of the opinion that the income of the deceased ought to have been assessed at Rs.21 ,GDOI- per annum. We, therefore, propose to recompute the compensation taking the income of the deceased at R321 .000/— per annum. 11.) By deducting the usual 1/3“ of Rs.21,000!— towards the personai expenses of the deceased, the ciairnants’ dependency is assessed at Rst 4:000/- per annum. 12) As deceased Nathuni Yadav. on the date of the accident, was aged about 28 years, appropriate muitipiier wouid be i? in View of the recent dictum of the Apex Court in the case of saria Verma {Smt} anti Cthers vs Eethi Ti'ansport Corporation am Amtt‘aet’ reported in (2mg) o Supreme Court Cases 121, wherein muitiptier of 17 was prescribed for the age group between 26-30 yéafS 13) By multipiying the annual dependency of Rs.14,GGG/- with the multiplier of 1?. the compensation works out to Rs.2,38,GOG/—. The ciaimants are further entitied to receive Reif‘JDSOI- towards funerai exeensee: loss of consortium to the widow and loss of estate. The a claimants, .thus, become entitled to receive a total sum of Rs.2,48,0DO/- as compensation for the death of deceased Nathuni Yadav in the motor accident. Mi Learned counsei tor the parties submitted that with a View to avoid any possible dispute between the parties about the period for which the claimants are entitied 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 itseif. 15) Considering ali the reievant factors inciuding the deiay in disposai of the ciaim petition and the present appeai, and the fact that the insurance Company alone is not to be biamed for the entire delay in the matter, we quantify the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.56,0GC)I- at Re.5,0GO/—. l5) For the foregoing reasons, the appeai filed by the appeilantez’ claimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs.‘l,92,00i3/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.2,48,GGGr- with further quantified amount of interest ‘4‘ e?‘ Rs.5,GGOI— on the enhanced amount cf campensaiion of Rs.56,GOD/—. T7) Respondent No.3 The Orienta! insurance Company Limited is granted three months‘ time fer depesiting the totai sum of RsEhOOGI- (Rs56,DGD/—towards enhanced amount of compensation + ReaGCGi— towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.56,DGOI—) before Va the concerning Ciaims Tribunai. subbu 18) No ordet as to costs. i- i a Sdl ‘Sd/- R.N.Chandrakar CHIEF JUSTICE Judge