lih.-..!1! •'c:: HIGHCOURTOFCHHATTISGARHATBILASPUR SinaleBench :H6h'bleShriDilJDRaosahebDeshmukh.J. ADpellants Owner & Driver M.A.fC).No^74/2008 1. Samrat Singh, S/o late Manbodh Singh, aged about 72 years, Caste-Rauttya, r/p vHlage - Raidand, (Bada Banai), Post - Portenga, Tahsil & Distnct Jashpur (C.G.) 2. Majriu ^am, S/o Shri phadhu Ram, aged about 22 yeare, Caste ~ Cheek, R/o Villaire •- Ara Ketar, Tahsil & District - Jashpur ''.(c-G-)..'\l'.'/.,.'./_j';/\.,l_..-.^^^ 3. Matria Singh S/o late ManbQdh Singh, aged about 64 years, Caste ~ Rautiya, R/o Village - Bada Banaj, Tahsil & District - Jashpur(C.G.) Versus I.DharamSingh.S/oEtwaSjngh.agedabout 46yeais. ;."' ; • \ ',' :1:1.,; '• 2. ^ Smt Dropdi Bai, VWo Shri Dharam Singh. aged aboui42 years, 3. (Minor) Ku. Hemawati, aged about 10 years, AIJ caste are Rautiya, R/q ViHage Bada Banai, Tahsil & District - Jashpyr (p^ l.''; •'..'1.'.1,'- ••..".•1 4. The New India Insurance Company Limited, Branch Office Satigudi Chowk, Rajgarh,DJstrict-Raigarh,(C.G.) APPEAL UNDER^EeTION 173 OF MOTORVEHICLE ACT Respondents Claimants/lnsurance 'M:7~r—T^^ r-- Present: Appellants by Shri Sunil Sahu, Advocate. ORALORDER (Passe<fon11.07.2008) Heard on admission. 2. Appellan^No.l & 3 i.e. owner of thetractor No. C.G. 14-A/1171 to whjph a trolley]iWSs attached and the appellant No.2 i.e. driver of the said tractor have preferred this appeal against an award dated 15.02.2008 passed ?Pr ili?PW^^^T?W^^^ --L- '^^ by the Motor Accidente Claims Tribunal, Jashpur, District Jashpur (henceforth 'the Tribunal') in Claim Case No. 37/2006 whereby while exonerating the insurance company from the liability to pay compensation in a death case, compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- was awarded against the appellants. 3. It is not disputed in this appeal that the deceased Madan Singh while travelling on the tractor was seated besjde the driver at the time of accident and died as a result of falling underneath the tractor. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted at the very outset that he is assailing the impugned award only on the ground of quantum of compensation awarded. According to him, the schedule appended to Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act is not to be applied in apptication under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act and the Tribunal instead of applying multiplier 15 ought to have applied a higher multiplier. No other pointwasurged. 5, Having considered the submission, 1 have perused the impugned award. The claimants were the parents, aged about 46 and 42 respectively and minor sister of the deceased. Taking the average age ofthe parents, in my considered opinion, the Tribunal has rightly applied multiplier 15 white assessing loss of dependency. in this view of the matter, 1 am of the r considered opinion that the impugned award does not call for any interference. 6. Accordingly, the appeal being deyoid of merit is dismissed at the admission stage. Consequently, I.A.No.1 for grant of stay also stands dismissed. Sd/- DiUp Raosaheb Deshmukh Judge Anjani i^i&^s$^ll^i^^.?®g@i'ili8i