Jeera Bai vs Devendra Kumar and Others

Rajeev Gupta, C.J.—Appellant Jeerabai is seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Fifth Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur (for short, ''the Tribunal'') vide award dated 24.02.2000, passed in claim case no. 68 of 1998.

As against the compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/- claimed by the appellant/claimant unfortunate mother of deceased Bahoran, by filing a claim petition u/s 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for his death in the motor accident on 22.07.1993, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs. 94,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment.

Shri Sanjay S. Agarwal, learned counsel for the appellant vehemently'' argued that the Tribunal has erred in awarding low compensation of Rs. 94,000/- only.

Shri Abhishek Sinha and Shri D.L. Dewangan, learned counsel for respondents No. 2 & 5, on the other hand supported the award and contended that the compensation of Rs. 94,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper compensation in the facts and circumstances of the present case.

As the claimant herself pleaded and proved the income of the deceased at Rs. 15000/- per month, she cannot have any legitimate grievance in regard to assessment of the income of the deceased by the Tribunal at Rs. 1,500/-per month.

The Tribunal has been quite liberal in deducting only l/3rd of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses, though the deduction in that behalf could have been to the extent of 50% as only two persons were dependent on the income of the deceased i.e., deceased himself and his mother claimant Jeerabai.

The multiplier of 7, selected by the tribunal also cannot be found fault with in view of the sole claimant Jeerabai was aged about 63 years on the accident and in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Smt. Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, , wherein multiplier of 7 was prescribed for the age group between 61 - 65 years.

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 claimant''s dependency by the Tribunal or the multiplier selected.

The appeal filed by the appellant/claimant for enhancement of the compensation, therefore, is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed.

No order as to costs.