HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Misc. Appeal No. 47 of 2005 APPELLANTS Shankar Lal Vishal & others. RESPONDENTS VERSUS Biltu Kenwat & others ORDER ^ For consideration |2--12-2011 Sd/- N. K. Agarwal Judge Hon'ble Shri Raieev Gupta ^ ^L^TT^-^—' Sd/- ChiefJustice Postfor: 13,-12-2011 Sd/- N.K. AgrawaS Judge '<? Sk :t'8'SS"'-'5^ .^/ "fS.in-W'fS''' "' HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR .A. No. 47 of 2005 APPELLANTS Claimants 1. Shankar Lal Vishal, S/o. Sahdev Vishal, Aged 50 years, 2 Smt. Kasturi Bai, W/o. Shankar Vishal, aged 45 years, 3 Smt. Kshema Bai, Wd/o. Late Surendra Kumar Vishai, Aged about 22 years. 4. Set Kumar Vishal, S/o, Late Surendra Vishal, Aged 2 years No. 4 minor, through natural guardian mother Smt. tehema Bai (No.3), AH R/o. Vill. & Post Arangi, Tahsil & District Mahasamund (C.G.) Versus RESPONDENTS h 1. Billu Kenwat, S/o, Panka Kenwat, aged 52 years, R/o. Vill. Batari, P.S. Basna, Distt. Mahasamund (C.G.) 2. Purna Chandra Pradhan, S/o. Makhan Pradhan, Aged about 55 years, R/o. Vill. Tala, P.S. Basna, Distt. Mahasamund (C.G.) 3. The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Through Divistonal Manager, Divisional Office - 2, Chawala Compiex, Devendra Nsgar, Rsipur rc.G'.) Miscellaneous appeal underSection 173 ofthe IVIotor VehiclesAct 1988 Division Bench: Hon'ble Shri Raieev Qupta. CJ. & Hon'bie Shri N.K. Aaarw'a!. J. ^Present : Shri Raghvendra Pradhan, counsel for the appellants. None for respondents No. 1 and 2 though served. Shri Sudhir Agrawai and Shri P. Dutta, counsei for respondent No.3. ORDER (Dellvered on |^ .12.201 1) PerN.K.Agarwal, J •"s 5. This is ciaimants' appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by 2" Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mahasamund (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 27.10.2004, passed in Claim Case No. 24/2004. As against compensation of Rs. 10,25,000/- claimed by unfortunate parents, widow and minor child of deceased Surendra Kumar by filing claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act') for his death in the motor accident on 16.11.2003, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs. 1,39,1 OO/- to the claimants alono with interest @ 8% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till its actual payment. The Tribunal, on a close scrutiny of the evidence led, held : the accident had occurred due to rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle tractor-trolley bearing registration No. C.G.- 06/A-4522 & C.G.06/A-4523 by its driver i.e. respondent No. 1 - Billu Kenwat; deceased Surendra Kumar died on account of injuries sustained by him in the said accident; respondent No. 3/lnsurance Company liable for payment of compensation as it could not establish the violation of policy conditions; assessed and awarded aforementloned amount of compensation to the claimants along with interest @ 8% per annum from the date of filina of claim petition till its actual pavment. Shri Raghvendra pradhan, learned counsel appearlng for the appellants would submit : the leamed Tribunal has erred in awarding low amount of compensation of Rs.1,39,1 OO/- only by taking into consideration the income of the deceased as Rs.750/- per month only and the amount of compensation deserves to be suitably enhanced. On the other hand, Shri Sudhlr Aflrawal and Shri P. Dutta, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 3/ Orientai Insurance Company Limited, supported the award impugned and submitted, in the facts and circumstances of the case, compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper comoensation and does not call for any interference. 6. We have heard counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record including impugned award. 7. True, the claimants pleaded that deceased was earning Rs.3,000/- per month bv workina as Labourer but failed to substantiate the same by teading cogent and clinchlng evidence in this reaard. The deceased was occupant of tractor and trolley. As per para 3 of the statement of owner of the tractor i.e. Puran Chandra Pradhan he used to pav Rs.25/- per day to labourers. Therefore. the finding of the Tribunal that deceased used to earn Rs.25/- per day and Rs.750/- per month cannot be found fault with. 8. Tribunal instead of deducting 1/3rd income of the deceased towards his personal expenses has liberally deducted Rs.150/- per month towards his personal expenses and assessed claimants' dependency at Rs.600/- per month and Rs.7,200/- per annum. 9. Looking to the age of deceased as 26 years at the time of accident, the Tribunal selected multiplier of 18 as prescribed in the Second Schedule under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, although the Supreme Court in case of Sarla Verma (Smt.l and others Vs. Delhi Transoort CorDoration and another reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121 has prescribed the multiplier of 17 for the age group between 26 to 30 years. 10. By multiplying the claimants' annual dependency with the multiplier of 18, the Tribunal awarded Rs.1,29.600/- towards loss of dependency. The Tribunat further awarded Rs.9,500/- on other heads. Thus, the Tribunal has awarded total compensation of Rs.1,39.100/- to the claimants along with interest @ 8% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till its actual payment. 11. The amount of compensation of Rs.1,39,100/- awarded by the Tribunal when examined in the light of above broad features of the case, we do not find anv scope for enhancement of the compensation awarded bythe Tribunat. 3^ 12. The appeal filed by the appellants/claimants for enhancement ofthe compensation, therefore, fails and is hereby dismissed. 13. Cross-objections preferred by the respondent No.S/Oriental Insurance Company has already been dismissed as not oressed vide order sheet date 07.12.2011. 14. No order as to costs. Sd/- ChiefJustice Sd/- ~1f N.K. AgrawaS j Judge