® HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISIONBENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINHA, J. APPELLANTS Misc. Appeal (Ci No. 896 of 2008 1. Jagannath Tiwari, S/o Late Girdhari Lai Tivvari, aged about 44 years, 2. Smt. Kavita Tiwari, W/o Jagannath Tiwari, aged about 40 years, 3. Ku. Divya Tiwari, D/o Jagannath Tiwari, aged about 21 years, All the appellants are Resident of 181, Road-3, Kasaridih, Durg, Tahsil & District-Durg (C.G.) Versus RESPONDENTS Driver Owner insurer 1. Prem Singh Rajput, S/o Gulab Singh Rajput, R/o Panchsheel Nagar, Durg, Tahsil & District Durg (C.G.) Hal Mukam-Village Rauta, Post-Him, Tahsil Dhamdha, District-Durg (C.G.) 2. United Road Career, Proprietor Mushtak Husain, S/o Late Julphikar Husain, in front of Swarup Talkies, Station Road, Durg, District - Durg (C.G.) Resident of H.I.G. - 2/273, Borsi Colony, P.S. Pulgaon, Tahsil & District - Durg (C.G.) 3. National Insurance Company Limited Mandal - 15, 18 Ravindra Sarani Poddar Court, Get No. -4, 6th Floor Kolkata (East Bangal) ^'s.'y^ Memo of Appeai Under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Present: Shri Prateek Sharma, learned counsel for the appellants. ORDER (9th July, 2008) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, CJ. Shri Prateek Sharma, learned counsel for the appellants is heard on admission. 2. The appellants have filed this appeal under Section 1 73 of the Motor Vehicles Act (for short 'the Act') for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Twelfth Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (F.T.C.), Durg, (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 17-12-2007, passed in Motor Claim Case No. 109/2007. 3. The claimants, unfortunate parents and sister of deceased - Atul Tiwari filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Act claiming compensation of Rs.1,31,26,000/- for his death in the motor accident on 27-09-2006, when the Motorcycle bearing registration No.C.G.07S.C./5309 on which he was travelling as pillion-rider was dashed by the offending vehicle - Dumper bearing registration NO.C.G.07C.-1226, resulting in multiple serious injuries to Atul Tiwari, who succumbed to those injuries during the course of his treatment in the hospital. The claimants further pleaded that deceased - Atul Tiwari was aged about 19 years; student of Third year of Engineering; used to earn Rs.8,000/- per month from tuition. 1. 4. The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the evidence led by the parties held that deceased - Atul Tiwari died on account of the injuries sustained by him jn the motor accident; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle - Dumper; as the offending vehtele - Dumper on the date of the accident was insured with the National Insurance Company Limited, the Insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimants. 5. The Tribuna! assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.45,000/- per annum. By deducting 50% of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.22,500/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.22,500/- with the multiplier of 15, the compensation was worked out to Rs.3,37,500/-. By awarding further sums towards funeral expenses, loss of estate and loss of tove & affection, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.3,53,500/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased - Atul Tiwari in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.3,53,500/- @ 6% per annum. 6. Shri Prateek Sharma, learned counsel for the appellants vehemently argued that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased; in assessing his income at Rs.45,000/- per annum only; in deducting 50% of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses as against the prescribed deduction of 1/3rd in that behalf, under Section 163-A ^ (. of the Act; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.3,53,500/- only to the claimants. 7. True, the claimants pleaded that deceased - Atul Tiwari used to eam Rs.8,000/- per month from tuition, but the evidence led by the claimants in that behalf was highly discrepant. The Tribunal, therefore, assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.45,000/- per annum on its own estimate. Considering that deceased - Atul Tiwari was a student of Third year Engineering, the assessment of his income by the Tribunal at Rs.45,000/- per annum, in our opinion, is rather on the higher side. 8. The deceased was un-married at the time of the accident and would have been married in due course. After his marriage his contribution towards the parents and sister would have been substantially reduced. In this view of the matter, we do not find any fault in the approach of the Tribunal in deducting 50% of the income ofthe deceased towards his personal expenses. 9. The multiplier of 15 selected by the Tribunal is rather on the higher side, in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombav Vs. Laxman Iverand Another. reoorted in (2003) 8 SCC 731, wherein it was held that in those cases where the claimants are parents of the deceased, the multiplier should never exceed 10. 10. We, therefore, do not find any scope for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal either on account of the assessment of the income of the deceased or the claimants' dependency by the Tribunal or the multiplier selected. subbu 11. The appeal, therefore, js liable to be dismissed and is hereby dlsmissed summarily. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge