Research › Search › Judgment

Chhattisgarh High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 296 (CHH)

BHARTI DHADA v. TAPAS @ RAMPAD MALIK

2009-11-13

RAJEEV GUPTA, RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR

body2009
ORDER As per Hon'ble Shri Rajeev Gupta, C.J.:- 1. This is claimants' appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the First Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 08.05.2003, passed in Claim Case No. 169/2002. 2. As against the compensation of Rs.22,00,000/-, claimed by the appellants/claimants, unfortunate parents of deceased Sujit Kumar Dhada, by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 04.10.2002, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1 ,22,000/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 assessed the income of the deceased at Rs. 1,500/- per month and Rs.18,000/- per annum. By deducting 1/3rd of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses, the claimants dependency was assessed at Rs.12,000/ - per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.12,000/- with the multiplier of 10 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 total sum of Rs.1,22,000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of their son Sujit Kumar Dhada in the motor accident. 4. Shri Aditya Khare, 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.1,500/- per month and Rs.18,000/per annum only; in selecting lower multiplier of 10; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.1,22,000/- only. 5. Shri AK Athaley, learned counsel for respondent No.3, The Oriental Insurance Company Limited on the other hand supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.1,22,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the present case as the claimants could not establish the income of the deceased as pleaded by them. 6. 5. Shri AK Athaley, learned counsel for respondent No.3, The Oriental Insurance Company Limited on the other hand supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.1,22,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the present case as the claimants could not establish the income of the deceased as pleaded by them. 6. As the respondents have not filed any appeal against the award, the findings recorded by the Tribunal that deceased Sujit Kumar Dhada died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 04.10.2002; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle minibus; as the offending vehicle minibus on the date of the accident was insured with the Oriental Insurance Company Limited, the Insurance Company was liable to pay compensation to the claimants, have now attained finality. That apart, these In dings are not under challenge before us in this appeal. We, therefore, affirm tl1e above findings recorded by tl1e Tribunal. 7. True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Sujit Kumar Dhada used to earn Rs.3,000/- per month as cleaner on the minibus, but the evidence led in that behalf was not of clinching nature. We, therefore, do not find any fault in the approach of the Tribunal in discarding the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased. 8. Nevertheless, the income of the deceased assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.1,500/- per month and Rs.18,000/- per annum is certainly on the lower side and requires re-consideration. 9. Claimants' son Sujit Kumar Dhada on the date of the accident was aged about 20 years. In the year 2002, he could have easily earned Rs.80 - 90/per day even by working as an un-skilled labour. We, therefore, propose to re-compute the compensation taking the income of the deceased at Rs.2,500/- per month and Rs.30,000/- per annum. 10. As deceased Sujit Kumar Dhada was un-married on the date of the accident and after his marriage his contribution to the claimants would have been reduced substantially, we deem it proper to deduct 50% of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Syed Basheer Ahamed and Others Vs. Mohammed Jameel and Another-1. The claimants' dependency, therefore, is assessed at Rs. 15,000/- per annum. 1. (2009) 2 SCC 225 11. Mohammed Jameel and Another-1. The claimants' dependency, therefore, is assessed at Rs. 15,000/- per annum. 1. (2009) 2 SCC 225 11. The multiplier of 1 0 selected by the Tribunal cannot be found fault with considering that the claimants are parents of the deceased and in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay Vs. Laxman Iyer and another-2, wherein it was held that in those cases where the claimants are parents of the deceased, the multiplier should never exceed 10. 2. (2003) 8 SCC 731 12. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.15,000/- with the multiplier 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 compensation for the death of their son Sujit Kumar Dhada in the motor accident. 13. 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. 14. 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 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/-. 15. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the claimants for enhancement of the compensation 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.3 8,000/-. 16. Respondent No.3 The Oriental Insurance Company Limited is granted three months' time for depositing the total sum of Rs.42,000/ - (Rs.3 8,000/- 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. 17. No order as to costs. Appeal Partly Allowed.