Research › Search › Judgment

Chhattisgarh High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 108 (CHH)

DHANESHRI BAI v. NASIR ALI ALIAS NASIR KHAN

2009-03-26

I.P.SHARMA, RAJEEV GUPTA

body2009
ORDER As per Hon'ble Shri Rajeev Gupta, C.J.: 1. This is claimants' appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Sixth Additional Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Durg, MP (henceforth, "the Tribunal") vide award dated 06.05.2000 passed in claim case No.34/99. 2. The claimants, unfortunate widow, minor children and mother of deceased Bhagat Ram Gond claimed compensation of Rs. 9 ,21,000/- by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (henceforth, ''the Act") for his death in the motor accident when on 13.10.1999 his bicycle was dashed by the offending Vehicle Bus bearing registration No.MP24-C/2612 resulting in multiple serious injuries to deceased Bhagat Ram Gond, who succumbed to those injuries during the course of his treatment in the hospital. The claimants further pleaded that deceased Bhagat Ram Gond was aged about 30 years and used to earn Rs.2,500/- per month by working as Supervisor in the Agricultural Farm of Man Rakhan Lal Dike. 3. The owner, driver and insurer of the offending vehicle bus contested the claim and denied their liability to pay compensation to the claimants on the plea that the deceased himself was responsible for the accident. The insurer took the further plea that the driver of the offending vehicle bus was not holding a valid driving license and the bus was being plied in breach of the policy conditions. 4. The claimants examined A W 11 Dhaneshri Bai, A W /2 Jitendra Nishad and A W /3 Man Rakhan Lal Dike in support of their claim whereas the driver of the offending vehicle bus examined himself as NAW 11 in rebuttal. 5. The Tribunal on a close scrutiny of the evidence led by the parties held that deceased Bhagat Ram Gond died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 13.10.99; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle bus; as the offending vehicle bus on the date of the accident was insured with Oriental Insurance Company Limited, the Insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimants. 6. The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.800/- per month and Rs.9,600/- per annum. By deducting Rs.200/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.600/- per month and Rs. 7 ,2001- per annum. 6. The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.800/- per month and Rs.9,600/- per annum. By deducting Rs.200/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.600/- per month and Rs. 7 ,2001- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.7,2001- with the multiplier of 17, the compensation was worked out to Rs.1,22,400/-. By awarding further sum of~s.5,0001- towards funeral expenses, the Tribunal awarded a total sum ofRs. 1,27,4001- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Bhagat Rarn Gond in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount ofRs. 1,27,4001- @ 12% per annum from the date of the filing of the claim petition, till the date of actual payment. 7. Shri CR Sahu and Shri Santosh Sahu, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not accepting the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased and in assessing his income at Rs.8001- per month only; and in awarding low compensation of Rs, 1 ,27,4001- only. 8. Shri Vinay Harit, learned Senior Advocate for respondent No.3 Oriental Insurance Company Limited on the other hand supported the award and contended that the Tribunal has been quite liberal in awarding substantial compensation of Rs.1,27,4001- though the claimants could not establish the income of the deceased as pleaded by them. 9. The findings recorded by the Tribunal that deceased Bhagat Ram Gond died on account of the in juries sustained by him in the motor accident on 13.10.99; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle bus; and the insurer of the bus was liable to pay compensation to the claimants, are not under challenge before us in this appeal. That apart, these findings, now have attained finality as the respondents have not filed any appeal against the award. We, therefore, affirm the above findings recorded by the Tribunal. . 10. True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Bhagat Ram Gond was working as Supervisor at the Agricultural Farm of Man Rakhan Lal Dike and was getting Rs.8501 - and two quintals of paddy every month. The evidence of AW/3 Man Rakhan Lal Dike is also to the same effect. We, therefore, affirm the above findings recorded by the Tribunal. . 10. True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Bhagat Ram Gond was working as Supervisor at the Agricultural Farm of Man Rakhan Lal Dike and was getting Rs.8501 - and two quintals of paddy every month. The evidence of AW/3 Man Rakhan Lal Dike is also to the same effect. Even otherwise, if the evidence led by the claimants about the income of the deceased was not found reliable by the Tribunal, the income of the deceased ought to have been assessed on the basis of the notional income prescribed in the Second Schedule under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act. 11. The notional income ofRs.15,0001- in the Second Schedule under Section 1 63-A of the Motor Vehicles Act was prescribed in the year 1994. The accident in the present case wherein deceased Bhagat Ram Gond lost his life took place in the year 1999. If the increase in the prices of essential commodities and the cost of living during the period between 1994 and 1999 is taken into consideration, the notional income of Rs.15,0001- prescribed in the Second Schedule in the year 1994 would certainly come to Rs. 18,0001- in the year 1999. We, therefore, propose to re-compute the compensation by taking the income of the deceased at Rs.18,0001- per annum. 12. By deducting 1/3 ofRs. 18,0001- towards personal expenses of the I deceased, the claimants' dependency is assessed at Rs.12,0001- per annum. 13. Considering that deceased Bhagat Ram Gond was aged about 30 years on the date of the accident, and his widow Dhaneshri Bai was shown to be 28 years of age in the claim petition, we are of the opinion that multiplier of 14 would be appropriate in the present case in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of New India Assurance Company Limited Vs. Kalpana and others1, wherein multiplier of 13 was found to be appropriate for the deceased aged about 33 years in the above said case. 14. By multiplying the annual dependency ofRs.12,0001- with the multiplier of 14, the compensation works out to Rs.l ,68,0001-. The claimants are further entitled to get Rs.50001- towards funeral expenses; Rs.5,0001- for loss of consortium to the widow and Rs.5,0001- for loss of estate. 14. By multiplying the annual dependency ofRs.12,0001- with the multiplier of 14, the compensation works out to Rs.l ,68,0001-. The claimants are further entitled to get Rs.50001- towards funeral expenses; Rs.5,0001- for loss of consortium to the widow and Rs.5,0001- for loss of estate. The claimants, thus become entitled to receive a total sum of Rs.l ,83,0001- as compensation for the death of deceased Bhagat Ram Gond in the motor accident. 15. 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 entitled 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. 16. Considering all the-relevant factors including the delay 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 delay in the matter, we quantify the amount of interest payable on the enhM1ced amount of compensation of Rs.55,6001- at Rs.14,4001-. 17. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the claimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs.l,27,4001- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.l,83,0001- with further quantified amount of interest of Rs.14,4001- on the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.55,6001-. 18. Respondent No.3 Oriental Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum ofRs.70,0001- (Rs.55,6001- towards enhanced amount of compensation + Rs.14,4001- towards quantified amount of interest on the enhanced amount of compensation ofRs.55,6001-) before the concerning Claims Tribunal. 19. No order as to costs. Appeal Allowed. 1. 2007 ACJ 825