COURT OF CIaiinants ^.L. ^J' ©UPTA,CJ. & HON'BLE SUNSL KUMAR SINHA, J. M.A.CCI No. 781/2008 1. Domeru Ram Patel, S/o Lt. Ramadhln Patel, aged about 40 years. 2. ParvatE Bai Patel, D/o Domeru Ram Patei, aged about 35 years. Both R/o Viliage -- Paratkol, Ta'n. Dhamdha, Distt. Durg (C.G.) Versus Santosh Kumar S/o Dehra Ram.R/o Viliage - Chuikhadan, Tah. & Distt. Rajnandgaon (C.G.) Praveen Parakh, S/o Bhagchand Parkah, R/o Vsilage - Panduca, Tah. Khalgarh, Distt. Rajnandgaon (C.G.) The New Endia Insurance Co. Ltd., Through Divlsjonai Manager, DJvision Office, Th.akar Chamber, G.E. Road, Power House, Bhilai, Distt. Durg (C.G.), Branch Offlce Stationroad, Parakhbhawan, Durg (C.G.) lerSect|oii,173_ofttie Motor Vehicles Act, Presenf: Shri C.R. Sahu, fearned counsef for the appellants. •QRO_ER 1 II (27tn Jyoe, The followlng ordsr of the Court was passed by Shri C.R. Sahu, learned counssl for the appeliants is heard on admission. __-, It-—-- 2. AppeJiants, unfortunate parents of deceased - Deepak Patel have flted this appea! under Section 173 of the Motor Vehides Act for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Twelveth Additlonai Motor Accident Ciaims Tribunai, Durg, (for short 'the TribunaE') vide award dated 05-03-2008, passed in Motor Claim Case No.145/2007. 3. As against the compensation of Rs.7,46,000/- claimed by the cialmants for the death of thelr son ~ Deepak Patel In the motor acddent, the Tribunal awarded. a totai sum of Rs.3,13,000/- along vv'Eth Interest @ 6% per annum from the of fiiing of the clalm petition tii! the date ofthe actual payment. 4. Shri C.R. Sahu, learned counsel for the appeElants vehernentEy that the Tribuna! has erred in awarding low.compensatlon of Rs.3,13,OOQ/-on!y. 5. ~ Deepak Patel was aged about 18 years on the of the accident. The Tribunal has assessed his Income at Rs.3,000/- per month. As the deceased was unmamed and would have married In due course, the Tribunal deducted 50% of the Incorne of the deceased towards his personai expenses and the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.1,500/" per month and Rs.18,000/- per annum. The muitiplier of 16 selected by the Tribunai Is rather on the higher side in view of the dicturn of the Apex Court in the case Cos'Dorstlon Vs. Laxman jyes' and reported in 8 SCC -731, v^hereln it has that in those cases where the claimants are psrents of the deceased; the mu!tipiier shouid never exceed 10. lasf^s^sss^'^'s :—— --rr-nTS '/^ 6. We, therefore, do not find any scope for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal elther on account of the of the Income of the deceased or the claimants' dependency by the Tribunai or the muitipfier selected. 7. The appeai flied by the claimants for enhancement of the cornpensation, therefore, Is liable to be dlsmissed and js hereby dlsmissed summarily. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- SunUKumar Sinha judge subbu