^-.p.^. HIGHCOURTOF^HHATTISGARHATBILASPUR DIVISIONBENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEB^ GUPTA, C.J. ^ HON'BLESHRIRANGNATHCHANDRAKAR,J. Misc.ADDeal{C)No.788of2009. ADpellants Claimants 1. Smt. Dahna Bai Rajhans, W/o Late Kola Kanhu Rajhans, aged about45 years. 2. Gaurango Rajhans, S/o Late Kola Kanhu Rajhans, aged about 30 years. 3. Parmanand Rajhans, S/o Late Kola Kanhu Rajhans, aged about28 years. All R/o village IBanipali, Police Station Basha, District Mahasamund,(C.G.). PresentR/0 Through B.L. Patel, Near Rameshwari Mandir, Chandini Chowk, New Shanti Nagar, Raipur DistrictRaipur (C.G.). VERSUS ResDondents Non-claimants 1. Ayyub Ali @ Baban, S/o Abbas Ali, aged about 30 years, R/o Village Chhote Temri, Police Station Basna, District Mahasamund (C.G.). 2. Jeet Singh Bagga, S/oTriIok Singh Bagga, R/o Near Purwa Palace, Avanti Vihar, Raipur District Raipur (C.G.). 3. The Manager (Divisional Manager) The New India Insurance Company Limited, through Branch Manager, The New India Insurance Company Limited, Second Floor, R.D.A.Building, Raipur Tahsil and DistrictRaJpur (C.G.). ;"a%^ Misc.ADDeal under Sectjon 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act. Present: Shri Dharmesh Shrivastava, counsel for the appellants. ShriShivendu Pandya, counselfor respondentNo.3. ORDER (21st July, 2011) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J; This is claimants' appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the First Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur (for short 'the Tribunal')vide award dated 03.07.2008, passed in Claim Case No.81/2007. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.19,00,000/- claimed by the appellants/ claimants, unfortunate widow and major sons of deceased Kola Kanhu Rajhans, by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 08.03.2007, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,04,500/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date offiling of the clajm petition till the date of actual payment. 3) The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it heldthat deceased Kola Kanhu Rajhans died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 08.03.2007; the accident occurred due to rash andnegligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Minibus bearing registration No.CG-04 E/0614; as the above offending vehicle ^"{ /^:€"^ //""'l.. \ g^ffhj ^., "sy '^ Minibus on the date of the accident was insured with the New Indialnsurance Company Limited and the insurance company could 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 bythe Tribunal have now attained finality. 5) The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.3,000/- per month and Rs.36,000/- per annum. By deducting 50% of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.18,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.18,000/- with the multiplier of 5, the compensation was worked out to Rs.90,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.14,500/- under other heads, the Trihunal awarded a totalsum of Rs.1,04,500/- as compensation to theclaimants for the death of deceased Kola Kanhu Rajhans in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensationof Rs.1,04,500/- @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri Dharmesh Shrivastava, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the claimants' evidence aboutthe income of the deceased and in assessing his income at Rs.3,000/- per month only; in deducting 50% of the income of the deceased towards his personal .'•^, x ^t^- y^y-j9 '";'.A. ,^' ^ expenses; in selecting the lower multiplier of 5; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.1,04,500/- only. 7) Shri Shivendu Pandya, learned counsel for respondent No.3, the New India Insurance Company Limited, the insurer bf theoffending vehicle Minibus, on the other hand, contended that as deceased Kola Kanhu Rajhans Was aged about60 years on the date of the accident, the compensation of Rs.1,04.500/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the preseht 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 and circumstances of the case. It should neither be a meager amount of compensation, nora Bonanza. 9) Now we shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.1,04,5007- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 10) True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Kola Kanhu Rajhans used to earnRs.150 -200/- per day as Carpenter, no cogent and reliable evidence was led before the Tribunal for establishing the income of the deceased to the above extent. In this state of evidence, we do not find any infirmity in the assessment of the income of the deceased by the Tribunal at Rs.3,000/- per month and Rs.36,000/- per annum. 11) The deduction of 50% of the jncome of the deceased by the Tribunal towards his personal expenses, in the peculiar facts ,'^, ^'-'' ^ of the present case, also cannot be found fault with asClaimants No.2 and 3 i.e. Gaurango Rajhans and Parmanand Rajhans are major sons of the deceased, who were having their own independent income and assuch, were not dependent on the deceased atall. 12) Nevertheless, the multiplierof 5 selected by the Tribunal is certainlyonthelowersideandrequiresreconsideration. 13) The Tribunal found that deceased Kote Kanhu Rajhans was aged aboutSO years on the date of theaccident as admitted by hisson, AW1 Parmanand. The dictum of theApex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt) and Others Versus Delhi Transport Corporation and another,reporteGl in (2009) 6 SCC 121 prescribes multiplier of 9 for the age group between 56-60 years. In our opinion, the Tribunalought t6| have applied the multipljer of 9. 14) By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.18,000/- with the multiplier of 9, the compensation works out to Rs.1,62,000/-. The claimants are further entitled to receive Rs.5,000/- towards funeralexpenses; 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. 1,77.000/-ascompensationforthedeath of deceased Kola Kanhu Rajhans in themotoraccident. 15) The claimants are fyrther awarded a sum of Rs.7,500/- towards quantified amountof interestonthe enhanced amount of compensation ofRs.72,500/-, ".-i'^....---•'•',' 16) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed inpart. The compensation of Rs.1,04,500/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.1,77,000/- with further quantified amount of interest of Rs.7,500/- on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.72,500/-. 17) Respondent No.3 the New India Insurance Company Limited is granted three months'time for depositing the totaisum of Rs.80,000/- (Rs.72,500/- towards enhanced amount of compensation+ Rs.7,500/- towards quantifiedlamountof interest on the enhancedamount ofcompensation of Rs.72,500/-) before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 18) No order asto costs. Sd/- Chief Justice subbu Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge 'h'