^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTiSGARH AT BiLASPUR DIVESION BENCH. CORAM: HON'BLE SHRS RAJEEV GUPTA, CJ. HON'BLE SHRS SUNSL KUNAR^tNHA, J. iVIIsc. Appeal (C.i. No. 953 of 2009 Appetlants CSaimants Respondents Non-Applicants 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 Devendra Kumar S/o Dr. Ghanshyam Das Baghei, aged about 14 years (now 16 years) Premanshu S/o Dr. Ghanshyam Das Baghei, aged about 12 years (now 14 years) Both presently R/o D.P.S. School Compiex, Junwani, Police Out Post Smriti Nagar, Bhiiai, Tahsll & District Durg (C.G.) Both minor through guardian next friend maternal Grand father Shri K.P. Khande S/o !ate Shri S.P. Khande, Retired Deputy Collector, R/o Shyam Nagar, Raipur, Tahsil & District Raipur (C.G.) VERSUS Kailu Ram Pate! S/o Ram Awtar Patel (Since dead). Smt. Bhagwati Patel W/o Late Kaiiu Ram Patei, aged about 52 years. Narendra Kumar S/o Late Kallu Ram Patel, aged abut 25 years. Babita Patel D/o Late Kaliu Ram Patel, aged about 27 years. Rani D/o Late Kallu Ram Patel, aged about 23 years. Asha D/o tate Kaltu Ram Patei, aged about21 years. Usha D/o Eate Kallu Ram Patel, aged about 19 years. Kanchan D/o Late Kallu Ram Patet, aged about 18 years. (Ail Legai representatives of dead non-applicant No.1 Kallu Ram Patel) A!I R/o Near Baba Ram Deo Mandir Balod, Tahsli Balod, District Durg (C.G.). ^ ^... 2. The New tndia insurance Co. Ltd. Through Branch Manager, Parakh Bhavan, Station Road, Durg, District Durg (C.G.) 3. Dr. Ghanshyam Das Baghel S/o Shri Nil Kanth Baghel, aged about 47 years, Address Medical Officer, Govt. District HospitaS Baikunthpur, District Korea (C.G.) JViiscelianeous Appea! under Sectiors 173 of the JVIotor VehicJes Act. 1988 Present: Shri Amiyakant Tiwari, learned counsel for the appeilants. ORDER (23rd July, 2009) The foiiowing order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. By allowing I.A.No.01/2009, the documents filed along with this appiication are taken on record. 2) Shri Amiyakant Tiwari, learned counsel for the appeiiants is heard on admission. 3) The appellants are seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the ESeventh Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Durg (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 17.04.2009, passed in Claim Case No.57/2007. 4) The claimants, unfortunate chiidren of deceased Dr.(Smt.) Padmavati Baghel claimed compensation of Rs.65,19,000/- by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for her death in the motor accident on 06.03.2007 when her Bajaj Scooty bearing registration No.CG-07 ZF/8965 was dashed by the offending vehicle Truck, bearing registration No.CG-07ZC/1075, resulting in 3 her instantaneous death on the spot itseif. The claimants further pleaded that their mother deceased Dr.fSmt.) Padmavati Baghel used to earn Rs.25,000/- per month as Doctor. 5) The Tribunat on a close scrutiny of the evidence ied before it heid that deceased Dr.(Smt.) Padmavati Baghei died on account of the injuries sustained by her in the motor accident on 06.03.2007; the accident occurred due to rash and negtigent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Truck; as the offending vehicle Truck, on the date of the accident, was Insured with the New India insurance Company Limited, the insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimants. 6) The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.2,35,161/- after deducting the professional tax and income tax on her gross-lncome of Rs.2,76,660/-. By deducting 1/3rd Qf Rs.2,35,161/- towards the persona! expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency was assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.1,56,774/-. By muJtiplying the annual dependency of Rs.1,56.774/- with the multipiier of 15, the compensation was worked out to Rs.23,51,610/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.9,500/- under other permissibie heads, the Tribunal awarded a tota! sum of Rs.23,61,110/- as compensation to the daimants for the death of their mother deceased Dr.(Smt.) Padmavati Baghel, in the motor accident. The Tribuna! further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.23,61,110/- @ 8% per annum, from the date of flling of the ciaim petition tii! the date of actua! payment. ^ 7) Shri Amiyakant Tiwari, learned counsel for the appellants vehemently argued that the Tribunal has erred in assessing the income of the deceased at Rs.2,35,161/- oniy; in deducting 1/3rd of her income towards her personai expenses; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.23,61,110 only/-. 8) In a motor accident ciaim case, what is important is that the compensation to be awarded by the Courts/ TribunaEs should be just and proper compensation En the facts and circumstances of the case. It shouid neither be a meager amount of compensation nor a bonanza. 9) The. multipiier of 15 seiected by the Tribunal considering that deceased Dr.(Smt.) Padmavati Baghel was aged about 45 years on the date of the accident is certainiy on the higher side In view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of NQW Sndla Asswance Co. Ud. Vs. Kalpana and others, reported in 2007 ACJ 825, wherein the muitiptier of 13 was found to be appropriate for the deceased aged about 33 years in the said case. 10) The deduction of 1/3rd of the income of the deceased by the Tribunal aiso cannot be said to be on the higher side as there were three members in the family including the deceased. 11) Since the income of the deceased has been assessed by the Tribuna! on the basis of the evidence led by the claimants themsefves including the salary certificate of the deceased, the appellants/ claimants cannot have any legitimate grievance in that behalf. ^ SUbbt? '^K^ 12) We, therefore, do not find any scope for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 13) The appeat filed by the appellants/ daimants for enhancement of the compensation, therefore, is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed summariiy. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge