A.P.r\. ( jr^hi?BI Clslmsnts 1. 2. 3. 4. Savitri Bai Balmlk wd/o Rajesh Kumar aged about 27 years, Ku. Manisha Balmik d/o late Rajesh Kumar aged about 10 years, i. Punam Balmikjd/o late Rajesh Kumar aged about 07 years, Naveen Kumar Balmik s/o iate Rajesh Kumar aged about 04 years. Appellant No. 2 to 4 are represented by legal guardian Mother Savitri Bai. Ai! are R/o of village Darripara, Tah. Gariyaband, distt. Raipur C.G. Non-appellants 1. Mahesh Kumar S/o Puran Vishwakarma aged about 35 years, r/o Jodhpur Ward, Dhamtari, distt. Dhamtari C.G. 2. Nank Chand Agrawal, s/o P.R. Agrawal, R/o M/s Ambika Tyres Micro Tyre, Bastar Road, Dhamtari, Tah. & Distt. Dhamtari C.G. 3. The New India Insuranc-e Company Limited, Thakkar Chamber, G.R. Road, Bhilai, distt. Durg C.G. J,;,l...... .,...... Present: Shri S.C. Verma and Shri A.L. Singraul, counsel for the appeliants. ^•a-&. <1 Shri Shailendra Sharma, counsei on behalf of Shri Prashant Jayaswa!, Sr. counsel for respondent No.3. st The following order of the Court was passed by This is claimants' appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dhamtari (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 18.10.2004, passed in Claim Case No.385/2004. i 2) As against the compensation of Rs.20,50,000/- claimed by the appellants/claimants, unfortunate widow and minor children of deceased Rajesh Kumar, bv filing aclaim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident in the intervenlng night of 26th & 27th May,2003, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,82,000/- as compensation along with interest 6% per annum in the event of insurer's failure to deposit the amount of compensation within 30 days of the passing of the award. 3) The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it he!d that deceased Rajesh Kumar died on account ofthe injuries sustained by him in the motor accident in the intervening night of 26th & 27th May,2003; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Truck bearing registration No.CG-05/4155; as the above offending vehicie Truck on the date of the accident was insured withlthe // A' s New India Insurance Company Limited and the Insurance Company could not establish any breach ofthe policy conditions, the insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the 4) As the respondents have not filed any appeal against t'ne award, the above findjnas recorded bv the Tribunal have now attained finality. 5) The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- per annum. By deducting 1/3rc! of Rs.15,000/- towards the personal expenses ofthe deceased, tha ciaimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.10,000/- per annum. By multip'ying the annua! dependency of Rs.10,000/- with the multiplier of 18, the compensation was worked out to Rs.1,80,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.2,000/- towards funeral expenses, the Tribunal awarded a total sumof Rs.1,82,000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Rajesh Kumar in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed pavment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.1,82,000,/- @ 6% per annum in t'ne event of insurer's failure to pay the amount of compensation to the elaimants within 30 days of the passing of the award. >) Shri S.C. Verma and Shri A.L. Slngraul, learned counsei for the appeliants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased and in assessina his income at Rs.15,000/- per annum oniy; and awarding low compensation of Rs.1,82,000/- only. :. e--^. v t%-/: J-< 4 ^ 7) Shri Shailendra Sharma, learned counsei appearing on behaif of Shri Prashant Javaswal, learned Senior Counsel for respondent No.3, the New India Insurance Company Limited, on the other hand, supported the award and contended that t.he compensation of Rs.1,82,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 8) in a motor accident claim case, what is important is that, the compensation to be awarded by the Courts/Tribunals should be just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the case. It should neither be a meager amount of compensation, nor a yonanza. 9) Now we shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.1,82,000/'- awarded by the Tribunai is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 10) True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Rajesh Kumar used to earn Rs.250 - 300/- per day from his Kirana Shop, no coaent and reliabie evidence was ied before the Tribunal to establish that the deceased was running any shop at a!l. No iicense, certificate or registration was produced before the Tribunal to establish that the deceased had any shop in the locality. In this state of evidence, we do not find any fault in the approach of the Tribunal in discarding the claimants' eyia'ence about the income of the deceased. . ?. '• !^^%1 k^»s" G 11) Nevertheiess, the income of the deceased assessed by the Tribunai at Rs.15,000/- per annum in the year 2003 is certainly on the lower side and requires reconsideration. 12) Consldering the age of the deceased, we are of the opinion that he could have easily ea'rned Rs.70-75/- per day in the year 2003 even by working as an unskilled labour. We, therefore, propose to re-compute the compensation taking the income of the deceased at Rs.2,000/- per month and Rs.24,000/- per annum. 13) By deducting the usual 1/3rd Qf Rs.24,000/- towards the personai expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency is assessed at Rs.16,000/- per annum. 14) Considering the age of the deceased, his. widow ana' their children, we are of the opinion that multiplier of 16 would be appropriate in th.e present case. 15) By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.16,000/- with the multiplier of 16 the compensation works out to Rs.2,56,000/-. The claimants are further entiti'ed to receive Rs.5,000/- towards funerat expenses; Rs.5,000/- for loss of estate and Rs.5,000/- for loss of consortium to the widow. The claimants, thus, become entitled to receive a tota! sum of Rs.2,71,000/- as compensation for the death of deceased Rajesh Kumar in the motor accident. 16) Learned counsei for the parties submitted that with a view to avoid any possible dispute'between the parties about the period for which the claimants are entitled to receive interest on the enhanced 'i-. -/ :l ^w-^ i: ^^^' 6 subbu 6 amount of compensation, the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation may be quantified in this appeal itself. 17} Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, inciuding the delay in disposal of the claim petition, and the present appeal and the fact that the Insurance Company alone is not to be blamed for the entire deiay in the matter, we quantify the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.89,000/- at Rs.11,000/-. 18) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appeilants/ daimants for enhancement of the compensation is ailowed in part. The compensation of Rs.1,82,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.2,71,000/- with further quantified amount of interest of Rs.11,000/- on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.89,000/-. 19) Respondent No.3 the New India Insurance Company Limited is aranted three months' time for depositina the total sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rs.89,000/- towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.11,000/- towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.89,000/-) before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 20) No order as to costs. ~p Ik; sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge B:,;