Research › Search › Judgment

Chhattisgarh High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 139 (CHH)

SARSWATI YADAV v. TIKARAM VERMA

2012-05-09

RAJEEV GUPTA, RANGNATH CHANDRAKAR

body2012
ORDER Rajeev Gupta, C.J. 1. This is claimants' appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Ninth Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur (for short 'the Tribunal') vide award dated 31.07.2009, passed in Claim Case No.95/2009. 2. As against the compensation of Rs.9,24,000/- claimed by the appellants/claimants, unfortunate widow and major sons of deceased Ghasiya Yadav, by filing a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 18.12.2007, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,58,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 7.5% 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 deceased Ghasiya Yadav died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 18.12.2007; the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Tractor-Trolley bearing registration Nos.CG-04/DA-5632 and C.G.-04/2C-8234 respectively; as Tikaram Verma and Ramratan Verma were owners of the above Tractor-Trolley respectively and the same was being driven at the time of the accident by Neeleshwar @ Neele, all of them were jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the claimants. 4. The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.3,000/- pet month and Rs.36,000/- per annum. By deducting 2/3rd of Rs.36,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the claimants' dependency was assessed at Rs.12,000/- per annum. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.12,000/- with the multiplier of 13, the compensation was worked out to Rs.1,56,000/-. By awarding further sum of Rs.2,000/- towards funeral expenses, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.1,58,000/- as compensation to the claimants for the death of deceased Ghasiya Yadav in the motor accident. The Tribunal further directed payment of interest on the above amount of compensation of Rs.1,58,000/- @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 5. Shri Suresh Tandon, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that though the Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.3,000/- per month, it has erred in deducting 2/3rd of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses in place of 50%; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.1,58,000/- only. 6. 5. Shri Suresh Tandon, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that though the Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.3,000/- per month, it has erred in deducting 2/3rd of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses in place of 50%; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.1,58,000/- only. 6. Shri C.R. Sahu and Shri C.K. Sahu, learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs.1,58,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. Learned counsel further submitted that the respondents have already deposited a sum of Rs.1,69,000/- before the Tribunal on 07.10.2009 in full and final satisfaction of the impugned award. 7. 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. 8. Now, we shall examine as to whether the compensation of Rs.1,58,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 9. As learned counsel for the appellants has not challenged the assessment of the income of the deceased by the Tribunal at Rs.3,000/- per month, we do not deem it necessary to examine this aspect of the matter. 10. The claimants before the Tribunal were Smt Sarswati Yadav, Rajendra Yadav and Jitendra Yadav. The first claimant is widow of the deceased and the two other claimants are his major sons. Even assuming that it was only claimant No.1 Smt Sarswati Yadav, who was wholly dependent on the income of deceased Ghasiya Yadav, the deduction of 2/3rd of the income of the deceased by the Tribunal towards his personal expenses cannot be sustained. The Tribunal ought to have deducted only 50% of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses. We, therefore, propose to recompute the compensation by deducting 50% of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses. The claimants' dependency, therefore, is assessed at Rs.18,000/- per annum by deducting 50% of Rs.36,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased. 11. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.18,000/- with the multiplier of 13, the compensation works out to Rs.2,34,000/-. The claimants' dependency, therefore, is assessed at Rs.18,000/- per annum by deducting 50% of Rs.36,000/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased. 11. By multiplying the annual dependency of Rs.18,000/- with the multiplier of 13, the compensation works out to Rs.2,34,000/-. The claimants are further entitled to receive Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses, Rs.5,000/- for loss of estate and Rs.5,000/- for loss of consortium to the widow. The claimants, thus, become entitled to receive a total sum of Rs.2,49,000/- as compensation for the death of deceased Ghasiya Yadav in the motor accident. 12. The enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.91,000/- shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 13. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants/claimants for enhancement of the compensation is allowed in part. The compensation of Rs.1,58,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.2,49,000/-. The enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.91,000/- shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 14. No order as to costs. Appeal Allowed.