HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON’BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON’BLE SHRI N.K. AGARWAL, J. Misc. Appeal No. 91 of 2006 Appellants 1. Jaibati, aged about 50 years widow Claimants of late Shrj Gangadhar, caste Gond; 2. Bijman Netam, aged about 11 years, d/o late Shri Gangadhar; The appellant No.2 is minor, through her natural guardian Smt. Jaibati widow of late Shri Gangadhar, and resident of village Koyba, post Indagaon, police station Deobhog, tahsil Gariyaband, districtRaipur C.G. VERSUS Respondents 1. Lekhram Dhruw, aged about 29 years, son of Shri Salikram Dhruw, resident of village Raveli, police station Chhura, district Raipur C.G. 2. Yashdeep Singh son of Shri Sardar Gurumel Singh, resident of Jaisingh Garage near Bhaisthan thasil and district Raipur C.G. 3. The New lndia Insurance Company Limited through Branch Manager, Branch Office First Floor, Madina“ Manzit Building, Jail Road, Raipur C.G. Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act 2 M.A. No. 91 of 2006 Present: Shri PP Sahu and Shri SP Sahu, counsel for the appellants. Shri Ajay Mishra, counsel for respondent No.3. ORDER (1 8‘“ October, 201 1) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. This is ciaimants’ appeal for enhancement 'of the compensation awarded by the 10th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur (for short ‘the Tribunal’) vide award dated 02.01.2006, passed in Claim Case No.19/2005. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.23,00,000/— claimed by the appellants/ claimants, unfortunate Widow and son of deceased Gangadhar Gond, by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 21.12.2004, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,22,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 9% per annum. 3) The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held that deceased Gangadhar Gond died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 21.12.2004; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Truck bearing registration No.C.G.-04/G3400; as the above offending vehicle Truck on the date of the accident was insured with the New lndia Insurance Company Limited and the insurance Company could not establish 3 M.A. No. 91 of2006 any breach of the policy conditions, the insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimants. 4) As the respondents have not tiled any appeal against the awardfthe above findings recorded by the Tribunal have now attained finality. 5) The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- per annum on the basis of the notional income prescribed in the Second Schedule under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act. By deducting 1/3'd of Rs.15,000/— towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants’ dependency was assessed at Rs.10,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.10,000/— with the multiplier of 11, the compensation was worked out to Rs.1 ,10,000/—. By awarding further ' sum of Rs.12,000/- under other heads, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,22,000/— as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Gangadhar Gond in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.1,22,000/— @ 9% per annum. 6) Shri PP Sahu and Shri SP Sahu, learned counsel for the appellants. submitted that the Tribunal has erred in assessing the income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- per annum only; in selecting the lower multiplier of 11; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.1,22,000/- only. 7) Shri Ajay Mishra, learned counsel for respondent No.3, the New India Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Truck, on the other hand, supported the award and - 4 M.A. No. 91 of 2006 contended that the compensation of Rs.1,22,000/— awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 8) Ih a motor accident claim case what is important is that the compensation to be awarded by the Courts/Tribunai should be just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the case. lt should neither be a meager amount of compensation nor a p bonanza. 9) Now, we shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.1,22,000/— 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 Gangadhar Gond used to earn Rs.1,800/— per month from his Kirana Shop and the r Tribunal has assessed his income at Rs.‘15,000/- per annum on the basis of the notional income prescribed in the Second Schedule under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act. 11) ln our opinion, assessment of the income of the deceased by the Tribunal at Rs.15,000/— per annum in the year 2004 is certainly on the lower side and requires reconsideration. 12) Considering that deceased Gangadhar Gond was aged about 55 years, we are of the opinion that he could have easily earned the ’sum of Rs.1,800/— per month pleaded by the claimants even by Working as an unskilled labour. We, therefore, propose to recompute the compensation taking the income of the deceased at Rs.1 ,800/- per month. ‘13) By deducting the usual 1/3” of Rs.1,800/— towards the / vx 5 \ M.A. N0. 91 of 2006 x.- personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants’ dependency is assessed at Rs.1 ,200/- per month and Rs.‘14,400/- per annum. 14) Considering that claimant No.1 Jaibati, widow of deceased Gangadhar Gond was shown to be 5O years of age in the claim petition and the Tribunal found that deceased Gangadhar Gond was aged about 55 years on the date of the accident, we are satisfied that multipiier of 11 selected by the Tribunal is appropriate in the present case. 15) By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.14,400/- with the multiplier of 11 the compensation works out to Rs.1,58,400/—. The claimants are further entitled to receive Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses; Rs.5,000/- for loss of estate; iand Rs.5,000I— for loss of consortium to the widow. The claimants, thus, become entitled to receive a total sum’of Rs.1 ,73,400/— as compensation for the death of deceased Gangadhar Gond in the motor accident. 16) The claimants are further awarded a sum of Rs.5,600l- f towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of X: t ' compensation of Rs.51 ,400/—. 17) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs.1,22,000/— awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.1,73,400/— with further quantified amount of interest of Rs.5,600/— on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.51 ,400/-. 18) Respondent No.3 the New lndia Insurance Company Limited is granted three months’ time for depositing the total sum of i l \ 6 M.A. No‘ 91 of 2006 @ Rs.57,000/- (Rupees fifty seven thousand only) (Rs.51 ,400/— towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.5,600/— towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.51,4QO/—) before the concerning Claims Tribunal. suhbéi' ~\ t f; 19) No order as to costs. i Sd/- . Sd/‘ t Chlef Justice 3 N.K.Agarwal Judge