^ HIGH CQURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. BLE SHRI RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR, J Claimants i^- ,^ Misc Appeal (C) No.439 of 2010 1 Smt Nirmala Rao Apturkar, widow of late.Mohan Rao Apturkar, aged about 38years 2 Ku Priyanka Rao Apturkar, d/o late Mohan Rao Apturkar, aged about 19 years 3 Minor Ku Neha Rao Apturkar, d/o late Mohan R.ao Apturkar, aged about 17 years 4 Minor Sagar Rao Apturkar, s/o late Mohan Rao Apturkar, aged about 13 years 5 Minor Ku Chhaya Rao Apturkar, d/o late Mohan Rao Apturkar, aged about 10 years Appellant No.3 to 5 are minors, through their natural guardian mother Smt Nirmala Rao Apturkar All are r/o New Changorabhatha, Shivnagar, infront of Govt School, Changorabhatha, Police Station DD Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur (CG) Amit Kumar Gupta, s/o late Ramkhilawn, Addres near Lakhenagar Chowk, beside Sharda Furniture, Police Statin Old Purani Basti, Raipur, District Raipur (CG) (Driver of vehicle Mini Bus NO.CG-04/E/0627) Smt Archana Sharma, w/o Ramesh Kumar Sharma, r/o Sector 3,Devendra Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur (CG) (Owner of vehicle Mini Bus No.CG- 04/E/0627) MAC No. 439 of 2009 ^ "^- National Insurance Company Limited, through Branch Manager, Branch Office, Navin Market, Phool Chowk, Raipur, District Raipur (CG) Miscellaneous Appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act Present : Shri MK Bhaduri and Shrl Prakash Tiwari, counsel for the appellants. . Shri Vasim Miya, counsel for respondent No.1. Shri Q Aziz, counsel for respondent No.3. ORDER >th (12InSeptember,2011) The foilowing order of the Court was passed by iev uupta, u.J. This is claimants' appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the 10 Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 21.01.2010, passed in Claim Case No.96/2009. 2) As against the compensation of Rs.12,00,000/-, claimed by the appellants/claimants, unfortunate widow and children of deceased Mohan Rao Apturkar by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 05.04.2009, the Tribunai awarded a total sum of Rs.4,45,326/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. MAC No. 439 of 2009 ^' t'- 3) The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led before it held that deceased Mohan Rao Apturkar died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 5.04.2009; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Minibus bearing registration No.CG-04-E/0627; as the above offending vehicle Minibus on the date of the aceident was insured with the National Insurance Company Limited, and the Insurance Company could not establish any breach of the policy conditions, the Insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimants. 4) As the respondents have not filed any appeal against the award, the above findings recorded by the Tribunai have now attained finality. 5) The Tribunai assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.3,000/- per month and Rs.36,000/- per annum. By deducting 1/3 of Rs.36,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency was assessed af Rs.24,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.24,000/- wfth the multiplier of 15, the compensation was worked out to Rs.3,60,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.68,326/- towards medteal expenses and Rs.17,000/- under other heads, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.4,45,326/-, as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Mohan Rao Apturkar in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.4,45,326/- @ 6% per ^" I 1 \\ ~"aiKagj^ ^ w^ '^y 4 MAC No. 439 of 2009 annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 6) Shri MK Bhaduri and Shri Prakash Tiwari, 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 hls income at Rs.3,000/- per month only; in deducting 1/3 of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses; in selecting the lower multiplier of 15; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.4,45,326/- only. 7) Shri Q Aziz, learned counset for respondent No.3, the National Insurance Company Limited, the insurer of the offending vehicle Minibus on the other hand supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.4,45,326/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 8) Shri Vasim Miya, learned counsel for respondent No.1, the driver of the offending vehicle Minibus also supported the award. 9) 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 bonanza. 10) Now, we shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.4,45,326/- awarded by the Tribuna! is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. \\ i^-A" ,^/"~^'» "^ 3 ~'-^:la*'j ^' ^ ^-^^ MAC No. 439 of 2008 11) True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Mohan Rao Apturkar used to earn Rs.8,000-8,500/- per month as Driver, no cogent and reliable evidence was ted before the Tribunal for establishing the income of the deceased to the above extent. In this state of evidence, we do not find any infirmity in the assessment of the income of the deceased by the Tribunal at Rs.3,000/- per month and Rs.36,000/- per annum. 12) The claimants' dependency also has been rightly assessed by the Tribuna! by deducting the usual 1/3rd of Rs.36,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased. 13) The multiplier of 15 selected by the Tribunal also cannot be said to be on the lower side as muitipliepof 15 has been prescribed in the Second Schedule under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act for the age group between 40-45 years. 14) For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any scope for enhancement of the compensation either on account of the assessment of the income of the deceased, or the claimants' dependency by the Tribunal or the multiplier selected. iS) The appeal filed by the appellants / claimants for -enhancement of the compensation, therefore, is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed. 16) No order as to costs. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/-'-,: .,' R.N.Chandrakar Judge ts. padma