c^ l^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF CHHATTISGARH ATBILASPUR ,;^0 li APPELLANTS yC'LAIMANT S RESPONDENTS , NON APPLICANTS (DRIVER) (QWNER) ( IINSURER) ^' 3) 1) ?>• M.A.(C.) No...3.?.2-..../^ Smt Poonam Katoch, aged about 40 years, W/o Late Shri Vikram Chand Katoch, Occupation House wife, Sachin Katoch aged about 17 years (Minor) S/o Late Shri Vikram Chand Katoch, Rahul Katoch aged about 15 years' (Minor) S/o Late Shri Vikram Chand Katoch Minor Appellant No. 2 & 3 through legal .representative of her mother Smt Poonam Katoch Appellaiit No. 1. All R/o Shyam Nagar beside of Gurudwara, Police station Telibandha, Post Ravigram Raipur, Tahsil & District Raipur (C.G.) VERSUS Tarsem Singh S/o Lakhbindar Singh Occupation Truck Driver, R/o Kumar Road Careers, Chhokra Nala, Telibandha Raipur, Tah & Distt Raipur (C.G.) Rajendra Singh S/o Tikam Singh Occupation Truck Owner, R/o Kumar Road Careers, C-hhokra Nala, Telibandha Raipur, Tahsil & District Raipur (C.G.) The Oriental Insurance Company Limited through Divisional Manager, Divisional Office No.l, ^) Kachahari Chowk, Jail Road Raipur, Tah 85 Distt Raipur (C.G.) w^" . MEMO OF APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF MOTOR VEHICLE ACT 1988. :^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARILAT BILASPUR M.A.fQNo. 382 of 2011 APPELLANTS Smt. Poonam Katoch & others VERSUS RESPONDENTS : Tarsem Singh & others CAPPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT) fSB: Hon'ble Mr. N.K. Asarwal, J.) PreSent : Shri AL Singroul, Advocate for the appellants. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 04.04.2011) 1. Heard on I.A.No.l, application for condonation ofdelay in filing the appeal. ( ^; 2. On dueconsideration, the grounds mentioned in the application, we are satisfied that the appellants has succeeded in explaining the cause of delay in filing the appeal. Therefore, the application is allowed and the delay caused in filing the appeal is hereby condoned. 3. The instant appeal has been preferred by the appellants, seeking enhancement of compensation against the awar.d dated 22.07.2010, passed by the XIVth Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (FTC) Raipur (for short 'the Tribunal') in claim case No. 152/2006, whereby an amount of Rs. 2,76,500/- has been awarded in favour of claimants and as against the ^3^ y^^."% ^.,,.,,,^,.,-,,. - ,> '<.:^^:':,:'. •','?< respondents along with interest @ 7 percent per annum from the date ofapplication till its payment. Brief facts of the case according to the appellants are : on 08.06.2006, while Vikram Chand Katoch (Since deceased) was going to Gujrat from Kolkata by driving the Tmck bearing registration No. WB-23-6569, driver of another Tmck bearing registration No. HR-58-3231 dashed the deceased's Truck from firont side as a result of which Vikram Chand succumbed to the injuries sustained inthe said accident. As against Rs. 13,50,000/- claimed by the claimants, the Tribunal, awarded total sum of Rs. .2,76,500/- as compensation in favour of the claimants along with interest @ 7 percent per annum from the date ofapplication till its payment. Only contention raised by Shri Singroul is that the tribunal has erred in holding the age ofdeceased as 53 years relying upon the date of birth whereas as per postmortem report^ his age was 47 years at the time of accident, and thus has erred in not applying proper multiplier. Shri Singroul, could not dispute that based on date of birth in the insurance policy filed by the appellants the date of birth of deceased is 26.04.1953 according to which he was aged about 53 years old at the time of accident^ therefore, the tribunal has not erred in taking into consideration the age based on date of birth bf deceased and has rightly applied multiplier which was based on decision of Supreme Court in case of Sarla Verma. 7. No other points have been raised by the counsel for the appellants. 8. For the reasons mentioned hereinabove, I do not find any scope for enhancement ofthe compensation awarded by the Tribunal. ^9. The appeal filed by the appellants for enhancement of the compensation is therefore liable to -be and is hereby dismissed. .} No order as to costs. Sd/- N.K. Agarwal Judge Sahu