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 1. itaram Sahu, S/o Mehatér Sahu, Non-applicants R/o Village — Vinayakpur, Police Station Pulgaon, District Durg (CG)’ Jenrail Singh Bhatiya, R/o Near MP Petrol Pump, GE Road, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon (CG) The Oriental Insurance company Limited, through Divisional Manager, Kutchery Chowk, Raipur, District— Raipur (CG) MISC. APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTO VEHICLE Misc. Appeal No.57 of 2006 1 Smt Sarswati Chaterji, aged about 32 years, W/o Late Sentu Chaterji Riya Chaterji, aged about 10 years, D/o Late Sentu Chaterji (Appellant No.2 being minor on behalf of through her legal guardian mother' the appellant No.1) AK Chaterji aged about 63 years, S/o Vijay Mohan Chaterji Rekha Rani Chaterji aged about 57 years W/o AK Chaterji All R/o Village Gogaon, Polic Station Urla; Raipur, District Raipu (CG)‘ VERSUS S R e r S ACT. Present: Shri Shivendu Pandyarcounsel for the appellants. Shri Sashi Bhushan, counsel for respondent No.2. Shri Sudhir Agrawal, counsel for respondent No.3. , ORDER (11m March, 2011) The folowing order of the Court was passed by l Rajeev Gupta, C.J. This is claimant's’ appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the 11‘“ Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Raipur (for short ‘the Tribunal’) vide award datedt 27.09.2005, passed in Claim Case No.04/2005. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.16,00,000/— claimed by the appellants/ claimants, unfortunate widow, minor daughter and parents of deceased Sentu Chaterji, by tiling a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act for his death in the motor accident on 19.01.2004, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.3,16,120/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per .. annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 3) Shri Shivendu Pandya, learned counsel for the appellants vehemently argued that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the claimants’ evidence about the income of the deceased and in assessing his income at Rs.2,365/- per month only and in awarding low compensation of Rs.3,16,120/— only. 4) Shri Sudhir Agrawal, learned counsel for respondent No.3, insurance Company Limited, on the other hand, the Oriental / @ supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.3,16,120/— awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 5) Shri Shashi Bhushan, Iearned counsei for respondent ¢ No.2, Jenraii Singh Bhatiya, the owner of the offending vehicle Dumper, also supported the award. 6) True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Sentu Chaterji used to earn Rs.4,500l— per month by working as Operator in a Private Company Uniworth/ Woolworth Textiles India Limited, the salary certificate of the deceased produced by the claimants before the Tribunal (Ex.P/6) established the gross-salary of the deceased at Rs.2,365/— per month only. We, therefore, do not” nnd any infirmity in the assessment of the income of the deceased by the Tribunal at Rs.2,365/— per month. 7) The claimants’ dependency also has been rightly assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.1,610/— per month and Rs.19,320/- per annum by deducting the usual 1/3rd of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses. 8) The multiplier of 16 selected by the Tribunal also cannot be; found fault with considering that deceased Sentu Chaterji was shown to be 35 years of age in his postmortem report and the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt) and Others Versus Delhi Transport Corporation and another, reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121', prescribes the multiplier of 16 for the age group between 31—35 years. 9) The Tribunal certainly has fallen into error in not awarding any sum towards loss of estate and in awarding low sum of Rs.2,000/- only towards funeral expenses. \ 10) We, therefore, award further sum of Rs.10,000/— inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation to the claimants in addition to the sum of Rs.3,16,120/— awarded a by the Tribunal. 11) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the “ appellants/ claimants for enhancement of the compensation, therefore, is allowed in part. The claimants are awarded further sum of Rs.10,000/- inclusive of interest component on the enhanced amount of compensation in addition to the sum of Rs.3,16,120/- awarded by the Tribunal. 12) Respondent No.3 the Oriental Insurance Company Limited‘ is granted three months’ time. for depositing the total sum of Rs.10,000/— before the concerning Claims Tribunal. nlmml 13) ‘No order as to cOSts. Sd/— Chief Justice Sd/— ‘x . Rangnath Chandrakar Judge