HSGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISSON BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, CJ. & HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J. Appellants Ciaimants MA.iO No. 130S of 2007 1 Smt Gaindi Bai w/o Late Radhe Lal, Age42 2 Ku Shushiia D/o Late Radhe iai Age 20 3 Ku Sangita D/o Late Radhe lal Age 19 Alt R/o near Puja Atta - Chakki, Ram Nagar, Mukti Dham, Bhilai, Tah & Distt Durg (CG) Resporsderits VERSUS Y Mohan Rao S/o Y Joga Rao, R/o Qu No.11 - C, Street No.54, Zone - 2, Balaji Nagar, Khursipar, Bhiiai, T^h & Distt Durg (CG) Smut Santosh Parihar, W/o Jiwan Singh Parihar, age 55, r/o. New Vijay Transport, Transport Nagar, Hathkhoj, Bhitai, Distt. Durg, Hall No. 13/83, Ram Nagar, SupeSa, Bhiiai, Dlstt. Durg. The Nationa! Insurance Co. Ltd., through DivisionaS Manager, Divisional Office, Akash Ganga, Supela, Bhilai, Distt. Durg. Appea! U/S. 173 ofthe MotorVshicies Act. Present: Shri Amiyakant Tiwari, counsel for the appeitants. ORDER (23rd February, 2010) The foilowing order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, CJ. Shri Amiyakant Tiwari, learned counsel for the appeilants is heard on admission. 2) The appellants are seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Fourth Additional Motor Accidents Ciaims Tribunal, Durg (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 10.08.2007, passed in Claim Case No. 17/2007. 3) As against the compensation of Rs.23,75,000/- claimed by theappellants/ daimants, unfortunate mother and sisters of deceased Rajulal and mother-in-iaw and sisters-in-law of deceased Sandhya @ Rani, by filing a claim petition under Section 166 ofthe Motor Vehicles Act, for their death in the motor accident on 14.01.2007, the Tribunal awarded a totai sum of Rs.5,22,750/- as compensation along with interest @ 8% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition titl the date of actual payment. 4) Shri Amiyakant Tiwari, learned counsel for the appellants vehementiy argued that the Tribunal has erred in awarding low compensation of Rs.5,22,750/- only though the ciaimants were wholly dependent onthe income of deceased Rajulal. 5) The Tribunal, on close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it; heid that deceased persons Rajulal and Sandhya Rani died on account of the injuries sustained by them in the motor accident on 14.01 .2007, the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicie truck; as the offending vehlcie truck on the date of the accident was insured with the Nationa! Insurance Company Limited, the Insurance Company was iiabie to pay compensation to the daimants. 6) For assessing the compensatlon for the death of deceased Rajulal, the Trlbunal assessed his income at Rs.35,375/- per annum. By deductlng 1/3rd of the above amount towards his personal expenses, the ctaimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.23,583/- per annum. By multiplying the annuai depeadency of Rs.23,583/- with the muitipiier of 15, the compensation was worked out to Rs.3,53,750/-. By awarding further sum of ^ Rs.9,500/- under other heads, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.3,63,250/- as compensation for the death of deceased Rajulal in the motor accident. 7) For assessing the compensation for the death of deceased Sandhya @ Rani, the Tnbunal assessed her income at Rs.15,000/- per annum on the basis of the notional income prescribed In the Second Scheduie under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act. By deducting 1/3rd of Rs.15,000/- towards her personal expenses, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.10,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.10,000/- wlth the multiplier of 15, the compensation was worked out to Rs.1,50,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.9,500/- under other heads, the Tribuna! awarded a total sum of Rs.1,59,500/-for the death of deceased Sandhya @ Rani. 8) The Tribunal, thus, awarded a total sum of Rs.5,22,750/- (Rs.3,63,250/- for the death of deceased Rajulal + Rs.1,59,500/- for the death of deceased Sandhya @ Rani) to the claimants. 9) On due consideration of the submissions of learned counse! for the appellants; the fact that deceased Rajulal was not employed in any regular empioyment; and deceased Sndhya @ Ranl did not have any income of her own, we are satisfied that the compensation of Rs.5,22,750/- awarded by the Tribuna! for the death of deceased Rajulai and his wife Sandhya @ Rani, cannot be termed to be inadequate so as to warrant enhancement in this appeal. 10) The appeal filed by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation,- therefore, is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed summariiy. _ .^.^..^^.. Sd/- Justice Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge subbu