\-'^ ^' HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHR! RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J, Mlsc, Appeal No. 240 of 2006 Claimants 1. Heeraram, aged about 48 years, Son of Shri Hinchharam Sahu. 2. Smt. Phekhan Bai, aged about 44 years, wife ofShri Heeraram Sahu; Both resident of village ,/Oondglri, Post Gondgirr, Tahsil arid Police Station Berta, District Durg (C.G.) 1. Narendra Pal Singh, Son of Shri Amarjeet Singh, aged about 25 years, Occupation Truck Business, Resident of Behind of Gurudwara, Santra Badi, Durg, District Durg (C.G.) 2. Santosh Kumar, Son of Shri Hariram Sahu, aged about 29 years, Resident of Village Khairagarh, Amlipara Ward No. 15, Poiice Station Khairagarh, Distrtet Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 3. The New India Insurance Company Limited, Parakh Bhawan, Station Road, Durg (C.G.) SC. APP6XL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 Present; Shri P.P. Sahu, counsei for the appellants. Shri Shree Kumar Agrawal, Senior Counset with Shri Anand Gupta, counsel for respondent No.3. r f4 (10th January, 2011) The fottowing order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. The appellants are seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bemetara (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 27.12.2005, passed in Claim Case Np.43/2005. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.17,00,000/- ciaimed by the appellants/ claimants, unfortunate parents of deceased Bhuneshwar Sahu, by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 07.11.2004, the Tribunai awarded a total sum of Rs.1,22,0001- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 3) The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held that claimants' son Bhuneshwar Sahu died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 07.11.2004; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicie Truck bearing registration No. C.G.04/ZC/7960; as the above offending vehicle Truck, on the date of the accident was insured with the New india Insurance Company Limited and the Insurance Company could not establish anv breach of the policv conditions, the Insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimants. >-a^ '"^. f<B4..^^J^-^^<. ZA 4) As the respondents have not filed any appeal against the award, the above flndings recorded by the Tribunal have now attained finality. 5) The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- per annum on the basis of the notional income prescribed in the Second Schedute under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act. By deducting 1/3rd of Rs.15,000/- towards the personal expenses of the - deceased, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.10,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of '"Rs.10,000/- with the multiplier of 12, the compensation was worked out to Rs.1,20,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.2,000/- towards funeral expenses, the Tribunal awarded a tota! sum of Rs.1,22,000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of their son Bhuneshwar Sahu in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.1,22,000/- @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actuat payment. 6) Shri P.P. Sahu, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribuna! has erred in not accepting the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased and in assessing his income at Rs.15,000/- per annum only; in selecting the lower multiplier of 12; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.1,22,0001- only. • i 7) Shri Shree Kumar Agrawal, learned Senior Counsel with Shri Anand Gupta, learned counsel for respondent No.3 the New India insurance Company Limited on the other hand supported the award and contended that as deceased Bhuneshwar Sahu was a young boy aged about 18 years only, the compensation of Rs.1,22,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances ofthe case. 8) True, the claimants pleaded that their son Bhuneshwar Sahu used to earn Rs.3,500/- per month byworking in a Private Plywood Factory, Raipur, no reliable and clihching evidence was led before the Tribunal to establish the income ofthe deceased to that extent. In this state of evidence, we do not find any fault in the approach of the Tribunal in discarding the claimants' evidence about the income ofthe deceased. 9) Nevertheless, the income of the deceased assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.15,000/- per annum in the year 2004 is certainly on the lower side and requires reconsideration. 10) Considering that deceased Bhuneshwar Sahu was aged about 18 years on the date of the accident, we are of the opinion that he could have easily earned Rs.80-90/- per day even by working as an unskilled labour. We, therefore, propose to recompute the compensation taking the income of the deceased at Rs.2,500/- per month and Rs.30,000/- per annum. 11) As deceased Bhuneshwar Sahu on the date of the accident was unmarried, we deem it proper to deduct 50% of Rs.30,000/- ^D towards the personal expenses of the deceased, in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Syed Basheer Ahamed and others Versus Mohammed Jamee! and another reported in (2009) 2 Supreme Court Cases 225. The claimants' dependency, therefore, is assessed at Rs.15,000/- per annum. 12) As the claimants are parents of the deceased, the appropriate multiplier in the present case would be 10 in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in - the case of Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay Vs. Laxman lyer and another, reported in (2003) 8 SCC-731, wherein it was held that in those cases where the claimants are parents of the deceased, the multiplier should never exceed 10. 13) By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.15,000/- with the muttiplier of 10 the compensation works out to Rs.1 ,50,000/-. The claimants are further entitled to receive Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses; Rs.5,000/- for loss of estate. The claimants, thus, become entitled to receive a total sum of Rs.1 ,60,000/- as compensatlon for the death of their son Bhuneshwar Sahu in the motor accident. 14) Learned counsel for the parties submitted that with a view to avoid any possible dispute between the parties about the period for which the claimants are entitted to receive interest on the enhanced amount of compensation, the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation may be quantified in this appeal itself. ^_^ ..<-i.'aiaai;' .*i0S.«A'^'!. '' ff' "^ ^. !<;a 15) Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, including the deiay 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 delay in the matter, we quantify the amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.38,000/- at Rs.4,000/-. 16) For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants/ claimants for enhancement -of the compensatlon is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs.1,22,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.1,60,000/- with.'further quantified amount of interest of Rs.4,000/- on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.38,000/-. 17) Respondent hjo.3 the New India Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.42,000/- (Rs.38,000/- towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.4,000/- towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.38,000/-) before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 18) No order as to costs. -- Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- Rangnart Chandrakar nimmi