HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J. Misc. Appeal (Ct No. 638 of 2008 .--y Appellants Claimants 1. Smt Leena Sahu, Age- 25 years, Widow of Late Lekhram Sahu 2. Bhawesh Sahu, Age - 4 month (Minor) S/o Late Lekhram Sahu 3 Smt Purnima Sahu, Age - 50 years, W/o Late Beniram Sahu Appellant No.02 is minor son of the deceased & is being represented by appellant No.OI/Mother of the appellant By Caste - Teli All the above are R/o Village Acholla, PS Tumgaon, Tahsil : Mahasamund, Distt Mahasamund VERSUS Respondents Non-applicants -ir? Sikattar @ Suktar Singh, Age 50 years, S/o Dilip Singh Panjabi, R/o Ravikaram Building, Bafna Road, Nandhed / Ardhapur, Distt Nandhed (Maharastra) (Driver of Truck NO.MH/26/H/5897) Gurmeet Singh Sandhu, S/o Sikdar @ Suktar R/o Ardhapur, Distt Nandhed (Maharastra) (Driver of Truck NO.MH/26/H/5897) The United India Insurance Com. Ltd., Through Branch - Manager, GG Road Nandhed, Branch Code No.230600 Nagpur Regional Office, Through United India Insu Com Ltd \- /^^ -\. ^ B.O Vivek Vardhan Seva Ashram Truct, Ashram Complex, Mahasamund, Distt Mahasamund (CG) (Insu Com of Truck NO.MH/26/H/5897) Appeal under Section 173 ofthe IVIotor Vehicle Act. 1988 Present: Shri JA Lohani, counsel for the appellants. Shri Dasarath Gupta and Shri Sanjay Gupta, counsel for respondent No.3. ORDER (14th June, 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 Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mahasamund (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 06.10.2007, passed in Claim Case No.8/2007. 2) As agaihst the compensation of Rs.43,30,000/- claimed by the appellants/ claimants, unfortunate widow, minor son and mother of deceased Lekhram Sahu, by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 18.12.2006, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.2,92,000/- 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 Lekhram Sahu died on account of ^i-ss-sai^ •'"',....,fi^: '•°• I -3 I S3!'s S ""t J ;3. the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 18.12.2006; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Truck bearing registration No.MH-26 H/5897; as the above offending vehicle Truck on the date of the accident was insured with the United India Insu'rance 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 by the Tribunal have now attained finality. 5) The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.100/- per day and Rs.3,000/- per month. By deducting 1/3rd of Rs.3,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.2,000/- per month and Rs.24,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.24,000/- with the multiplier of 12, the cbmpensation was worked out to Rs.2,88,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.2,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.2,000/- for loss of consori:ium to the widow, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.2,92,000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Lekhram Sahu in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.2,92,000/- @ 6% per \: r^\"} ,„ .y annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri JA Lohani, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribuna( has erred in selecting the lower multiplier of 12; in awarding only Rs.2,000/- each towards funeral expenses and loss of consortium to the widow and in awarding low compensation of Rs.2,92.000/- only. 7) Shri Dasarath Gupta and Shri Sanjay Gupta, learned counsel for respondent No.3, the United India Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Truck on the other hand, supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.2,92,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 8) On a thorough scrutiny of the entire evidence led by the claimants about the income of the deceased, we are satisfied that the Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.100/- per day and Rs.3,000/- per month. 9) The claimants' dependency also has been rightly assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.2,000/- per month and Rs.24,000/- per annum, by deducting the usual 1/3 of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses. 10) Nevertheless, the multiplier of 12 selected by the Tribunal is certainly on the lower side and requires reconsideration. ^ ,\ ^ 11) Considering the age of the deceased, his widow, minor son and mother, we are of the opinion that multiplier of 16 would be appropriate in the present case. 12) By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.24,000/- with the multiplier of 16, the compensation works out to Rs.3,84,000/-. The claimants are further entitled to receive Rs.5,000/- towards 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.3,99.000/- as compensation for the death of deceased Lekhram Sahu in the motor accident. 13) 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 amountof compensation, the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation may be quantified in this appeal itself. 14) Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, including the delay in disposal of the claim petition, and the present appeal and the fact that thelnsurance 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 ofRs.1,07,000/-at Rs.13,000/-. 15) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of thecompensation is padma ^ allowed in part. The compensation of Rs.2,92,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.3,99,000/- with further quantified amount of interest of Rs.13,000/- on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.1,07,000/-. 16) Respondent No.3 the United India Insurance Company Limited is'granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.1,20,000/- (Rs.1,07,000/- towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.13,000/- towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.1,07,000/-) before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 17) Np.orderastocosts. _ Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge Y <,;