[ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J, Appellants Claimants Respondents Non-applicants Misc. Appeal (C) No.254 of 2006 1 Tekram Sinha, Son of Dhana Jeet Sinha aged about 49 years 2 Shrimati Shantibai, wife of Tekram Sinha, aged about 45 years Both resident of village Rangitola (Chichola) Tahsil - Churiya, District Rajnandgaon (CG) VERSUS 1. Paras Das @ Parakh Das, Son Dukharam Sahu, aged about 25 years, resident of Village Halekosa, Police Station Churiya, Tahsil - Churiya, District Rajnandgaon (CG) 2. Shisupal, Son of Podhilal Patel, aged not known, resident of Village Halekosa, Tahsil - Churiya, District Rajnandgaon (CG) 3 The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Registered & HeadOffice, Oriental House A 25/27 Asif Ali Road, New Delhi, Divisional Office, through Divisional Manager, Malviyanagar, Durg, Tahsil & District Durg (CG) MISC. APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLESACT.1988. Present: ShriAbhishek Shar'ma, counsel for the appellants. Shri Basaht Dewangan, counsel for respondents No.1 and2. Shri Vinod Deshmukh, counsel for respondent No.3. .^fc^^ r, .S*^?y"S's ' ;sai-'1' :s •;^.--^ s "^" ^' ""i>^ "^.^' "''^^E-WS^' ORDER (25th April, 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, Rajnandgaon (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 12.05.2006, passed in Claim Case No.98/2005. 2) . As against the compensation of Rs.6,23,000/- claimed by the appellants/ claimants, unfortunate parents of deceased Gopiram Sinha, by filing a claim petition under Section 166 ofthe Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 25.07.2004, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,46,500/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filjng 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 claimants' son Gopiram Sinha died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 25.07.2004; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the motorcyclist of the offending vehicle Hero Honda Motorcycle bearing registration No.C.G.-08E/3260; as the above Motorcycle on the date of the accident was insured with the Oriental Insurance 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. •«1-'-:-" ;; •~;v^~<y'-^^-i?Sf' 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.4,000/- per month and Rs.48,000/- per annum. By deducting 3/4 of Rs.48,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.12,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.12,000/- with the multiplier of 11, the compensation was worked out tp Rs.1,32,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.14,500/- under other heads, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,46,500/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Gopiram Sinha in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.1,46,500/- @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri Abhishek Sharma, learned counsel for the appellants vehemently argued that the Tribunal has erred in deducting 3/4 of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses and in awarding low compensation of Rs.1,46.500/- only. 7) Shri Vinod Deshmukh, learned counsel for respondent No.3 the Oriental Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the Motorcycle, on the other hand, supported the award and contended that the compensationof Rs.1,46,500/- awarded by psuonuaiu 8Aoqe eq} jo ixaiuoo sqt ui peuiLuexe usqm |eunqui eq) Aq pspJBMB -/Q09'9^'l'sy ^o uoiiesuedLUOo 941 (zi. •p8seao9p 941 p eiuooui sqt jo %OS ussq SABL) 0} iqBno jieiisq leyi ui uoitonpap 3)eudojdde sv^ 'szz seseo ijnoo aiuejdns Z (600Z) u! ps^odaj jaijioue pue |eeuiep paiuujeyoiAi snsjaA sjei|io pue peiueijv jasiiseg paAs p aseo 941 ui }jnoo xedy 94t P Lunpip eqi jo MSIA u| -sesusdxa leuosjed siq spJGMOi pesesoap SL|I jo aLuooui 94} p ^/£ Suitonpep 01 jojja oiui US||BJ A|uie}j90 seq 'uoiuido jno ui 'ieunqui eqi 'doqs Buuiedsj a|oAo e 6uiuunj Aq Aep jad -/ooz-OSI-'sy UJES 0} pesn uos jieqi leqi papB9|d siueaiieio sqi •sjesA g^ pue sjeaA 6^ inoqe peBe siuejed siq aje s}UELUieio aqi 'iuapiooe eqi jo 9}ep 94) uo sjeaA 6 \. inoqe pa6e SBM ELJUIS Luejidog peseeosQ (|. \, •sseo luasejd 9qi j.o seoueiSLunojio pue spe^ siji ui uoiiesusdLuoo jadojd pue isnf si |eunqui aq} Aq pepjeMB -/OOS'9frTsy p uoitBsusdiuoo sqi jaq^aqM o( se suiujexe ||BL|S eM MON (o\. •ezueuog e jou 'uoiiesuadujoo 10 }unoLUB jsCeeLU e eq jeqiisu pinoqs )| -sseo eqt jo ssoueisLunojp pue spe^ eqi ui uoiiesuedLuoo jsdojd pue isnf aq pinoijs s|Bunqui/s)Jnoo aqi Aq pepjEMB eq 01 uoiiesuedujoo 94} 'ieyi si luepodLui si ^eqM 'eseo LUIE|O lusppoe JOIOLU e u| (6 •pjeme eqf psfjoddns OS|B 'z pue I.'ON siuepuodssj JQJ |asunoo psujesi 'ueBueMea tuesEg uqs (9 •aseo luesejd sqi ^o s33ue)SLunoJjo pue spe.t sqi ui uoitesuaduioo jadojd pue fsnf si |eunqui 94} broad features of the case, in our opinion, is certainly on the lower side and deserves to be enhanced to some extent. 13) Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, we are of the opinion that further award of Rs.50,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation would make the compensation of Rs.1,46,500/- awarded by the Tribunal as just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 14) The appeal filed by the appellants/ daimants for enhancement, of the compensation, therefore, is allowed in part. The claimants are awarded further sum of Rs.50,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation in addition to the sum of Rs.1,46,500/- awarded by the Tribunal. 15) Respondent No.3 the Oriental Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.50,000/- before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 16) No order as to costs. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge nimmi