-a^t-N HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLESHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J. Misc. Appeal (C) No. 965 of 2008 Appellants Claimants Smt Daya Bai, wife of Rup Das Gilhare, aged about 45 years Ram Ratan son of Late Rupdas Gilhare, aged about 30 years Both are resident of village Nawagaon (Katel) Tah and Distt Dhamtari (CG) Respondents Defendant No.1 VERSUS Devendra Kurve, aged about 32 years, son of Ramji Kurve, resident of Muth Puraina, Raipur, Tahsil and Distt Raipru (CG) (Driver) M/s Kanker Roadways, Civil Lines, Raipur, Tahsil and Distt Raipur (CG) (Owner) The New India Insurance Com. Ltd. Power House, Bhilai, Tahsil and Distt Durg (CG) (Insurer) Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act. 1988 Present: Ms Seema Dixit, counsel for the appellants. Shri Deepak Gupta, counsel for respondent No.3. ORDER rth (17"'June,2011) •\ \. 'ra»e. ^^ j g ^SSiS^ ^v^ .^., ••'''? The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. The unfortunate widow and major son of deceased Rup Das Gilhare are the appellants before us in this appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dhamtari (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 26.02.2008, passed in Claim Case No. 103/2007. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.7,16.000/- claimed by the appellants/ claimants, unfortunate widow and major son of deceased Rup Das Gilhare, by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 10.05.2007, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,42,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 3) The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held that deceased Rup Das Gilhare died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 10.05.2007; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle bus bearing registration NO.C.G.-04/E-0693; as the above offending vehicle bus on the date of the accident was insured with the New India Insurance Company Limited and the Insurance Company could \^ ;; -<.; -^ ^~'S9'^V;V^~' not establish any breach of the policy conditions, the Insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimants. 4) As the respondents have not filed any appeal against the award, the above findings recorded by the Tribunal have now attained finality. 5) The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- per annum, on the basis of the notional income prescribed in the Second Schedule under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act. By deducting 1/3rd of Rs.15,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.10,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.10,000/- with the multiplier of 13, the compensation was worked out to Rs.1,30,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.12,000/- under other heads, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,42,000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Rup Das Gilhare in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.1,42,000/- @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Ms Seema Dixit, learned counsel for the appellants submittQd that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased and in assessing his income at Rs.15,000/- per annum only; in selecting the lower multiplier of 13; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.1,42,000/-only. 7) Shri Deepak Gupta, learned counsel for respondent No.3, the New India Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle bus, on the other hand, supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.1,42,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 8) In a motor accident claim case, what is important is that, the compensation to be awarded by the Courts/Tribunals should be just and proper compensation in the facts andcircumstances of the case. It should neither be a meager amount of compensation, nor a Bonanza. 9) Now we shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.1,42,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 10) True, the daimants pleaded that deceased Rup Das Gilhare used to earn Rs.100-125/- per day as Hamal / Coolie, no cogent and reliable evidence was led before the Tribunal to establish the income of the deceased to that extent. We, therefore, do not find any fault in the approach of the Tribunal in discarding .the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased. \^ /r 11) Neveri:heless, the income of the deceased assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.15,000/- per annum in the year 2007 is ceri:ainly on the lower side and requires reconsideration. 12) Considering that deceased Rup Das Gilhare was aged about 50 years on the date of the accident, we are of the opinion that he could have easily earned Rs.70-75/- per day even by working as an unskilled labour in the year 2007. We, therefore, propose to re-compute the compensation taking the income of the deceased at Rs.2,000/- per month and Rs.24,000/- per annum. 13) By deducting the usual 1/3rd of Rs.24,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency isassessed at Rs.16,000/- perannum. 14) The multiplier of 13 selected by the Tribunal considering that deceased Rup Das Gilhare was shown to be 50 years of age in his postmortem report, in our opinion, is appropriate in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt) and Others Versus Delhi Transport Corporation and another, reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121 wherein multiplier of 13 has been prescribed forthe age group between 46-50 years. 15) By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.16,000/- with the multiplier of 13 the compensation works out to Rs.2,08,000/-. The claimants are further entitled to receive Rs.5,000/- towards •"'K&<. \ '"8<a,>> ^. I .„—_ ~& •sssss3^ j '^ 'Br-y "y-^^ ^ funeral expenses; Rs.5,000/- for loss of estate and Rs.5,000/- for loss of consortium to the widow. The claimants, thus, become entitled to receive a total sum of Rs.2,23,000/- as compensation for the death of deceased Rup Das Gilhare in the motor accident. 16) Learned counsel for the parties submitted that with a view to avoid any possible dispute between the parties before the Tribunal about the period for which the claimants are entitled to receive interest on the enhanced amount of compensation, the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation may be quantified in this appeal itself. 17) Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, including the delay in disposal of the claim petition, and the present appealand the fact that the Insurance Company alone is not to be blamed for the entire delay in the matter, we quantify the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.81,000/- at Rs.9,000/-. 18) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs.1,42,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.2,23,000/- with further quantified amounjt of interest of Rs.9,000/- on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.81,000/-. ~'^—.--—----—.—. l .:;;1-E;.-::;1 '~;. ...^ '•'' 1 '' ""^" 19) Respondent No.3 the New India Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.90,000/- (Rs.81,000/- towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.9,000/- towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.81,000/-) before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 20) No order as to costs. Sd/- 'Chief Justice subbu R.N. Chandrakar Judge •\. \