^L—' I iiifll& IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ^2JJ0:' M.A.NO. APPELLANTS : ^JJ°:< :NO. 2^07 1. .c^" 2. ......?% ^ff ^' \2U5Hlt.A6Ai Ravi Kumar Veshanav @ Raja, S/o -Ramlochan Veshanav, Aged - 2 lyears, R/o - in front of Nutan Choak Indira Vihar Gat, Thana - Sarkanda, Tah. & Dist. - Bilaspur. Ramlochan Veshanav, S/o - Manbodh Das Aged- 55 years, R/o - in front of Nutan Choak Indira Vihar Gat, Thana Sarkanda, Tah. 8s Dist. Bilaspur (C.G.). YERSUS RESPONDENT :- HHti^fcy- Yadav W/o Santosh Lal, Aged About 38 Years, R/0 Nutan Chaok Thana Sarkanda Tah. 85 Dist. Bilaspur (C.G.) APPLICATION FOR UNDER SECTION 17^) OF THE MOTOR ^^M^^EHICLE ACT 1988 fTHER AFTER CALLED THE ACT FOR 7 APARNA V^THANCMMENT OF THE AMOUNT OF COMPENSATION IND MODEFICATION REGARDING APORTIONMENT QF AMOUNT OF COMPENSATIQN .:-57t^ '•^f^^,^A ^•^••C^.h'^^ HJGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH ArgLLASPUR .A.rCtNo.1102 of2607 APPELLANTS Ravi Kumar Veshnav @ Raja & another Versus RESPONDENT Sushija Baj Yadav APPEAL U/S 173 (11 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT. 1988 fSlnaJe Bench: Hon'bie Mr. N.K. AaanA/al. J.i Present : Shri Vijay K. Deshmukh, counsel for the appellants. Ms. Annu Glri; counsei for the respondent. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 02nd day of February, 2010) This is owner's appeal against the award dated 20-03-2W7 passed by Sixth Additiona! Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur (for short 'the Tribunal') in Clatm Case No. 12/2006 whereby and whereunder an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- has been awarded in favour of the respondent for the death of .Jjtendra Yadav l.e. son of the respondent in the motor accident. 2. The facts briefiy stated are as under: On 15-03-2006, deceased Jltendra Yadav whlle sittlng as piljion rider with Ravl Kumar @ Raja on motorcycle bearing reglstration No. CG 10 B.A./2082 and was coming from Chantjdih Sabji Mandl, the said motorcycle met with an accident and died on account of the injuries sustained by hlnrs Jn the said accldent- 3. The respondent mother and of the deceased has preferreol claim petitlon under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act (for short 'She Act") claiming Rs.15,00,000/- as compensation for the death of the deceased agalnst the app^Ilants, 4. Learned TribunaJ on cSose scrutiny of the evidence ied, 'materiai piaced and submlssions made by the parties, awarded a iump sum of Rs.2,00,000/- as compensation aiong with Interest @ 12% per annum from the date of applicatjon tilJ the date of actual payment. Kvr 5. Learned counsel for the appeiiant would submit that the amount awarded by the iearned Tribunai is shockingly on hlgher side and deserves to be reduced. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent would submit that the compensatjon awarded is just and proper and deserves to be upheld. 7. I have heard iearned counsel for the parties and 'perused the award impugned. 8. 3t is true that the iearned Tribunai has awarded a lump sum of Rs.2,00,000/- towards compensation but even if the same is recomputed by taking jnto consideration the amount of Rs.36,000/- per annum, as yearly notlonai income ofthe deceased, in vlew ofjudgment of the Divjsion Bench of thls Court in case of Dusjan & Others vs. Ashoh Kumsr & Offiei^, reported in 2009 (3) C.G.LJ. 181, as accident took place jn the year 2006 in the instant case; and if we deduct 50% of it towards personai expenses of the deceased, then the !oss of dependency wouid be Rs.18,CX30/- per annum. Since the ciaimant Js mother, therefore, if we appEy the multipjier of 10 jn view of the judgment of the Apex Court jn the case of Munidpal Corporation of Greater Bombay vs Laxman fyer ancf another, reported in (2003) 8 SCC 731, then the compensation on account of loss of dependency would be Rs.1,80,000/- and by adding further amount of Rs.20,000/- on other heads, the compensation would be Rs.2,00,(X)0/- i.e. not less than the amount awarded by the Tribunal. 10. In view of the above, since the amount awarded by the Tribunal Is just and proper, J do not fjnd any ijiegallty/jnfirmity In the award impugned passed by the iearned Tribunal, the appeat filed by the appellants being devoid of merits, is iiable to be and is hereby djsmissed, No order asto costs. Sd/- N.K. Agarwai Judge