Kiran Netam (Smt.) and Others vs Netram Sahu and Others

Rajeev Gupta, C.J.—Learned Counsel for the appellants is heard on admission.

The appellants are seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Balod, District Durg (for short "the Tribunal") vide award dated 31-1-2009, passed in Claim Case No. 25/2008.

As against the compensation of Rs. 13,85,000/- claimed by the claimants, unfortunate widow, mother and minor children of deceased Jeevan Netam by filing a claim petition u/s 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act for his death in the motor accident on 7-3-2008 when his motorcycle was dashed by the offending vehicle Truok/Dumper bearing Registration No. CG07ZC/1301, resulting in his instantaneous death on the spot itself, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs. 4,19,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment.

Shri Indra Sen Sahu, 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 his income at Rs. 3,000/- per month; and in awarding low compensation of Rs. 4,19,000/- only.

True, the claimants pleaded that deceased Jeevan Netam used to earn Rs. 8,000/- per month by working as Supervisor with a Contractor and from his cycle-shop, but the evidence led in that behalf could not establish his income to the extent of Rs. 8,000/-. The contractor examined by the claimants, Jahid Ahmed Khan (A.W. 2), stated that an amount of Rs. 2,000/- per month was being paid by him to deceased Jeevan Netam.

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.

The Tribunal has rightly assessed the claimants'' dependency at Rs. 24,000/- per annum by deducting the usual 1/3rd of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses.

The multiplier of 16 selected by the Tribunal is rather on the higher side in view of the fact that deceased Jeevan Netam was aged about 40 years and in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of The New India Assurance Company Limited Vs. Smt. Kalpana and Others, .

We, therefore, do not find any scope for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal either on account of the assessment of the income of the deceased or the claimants'' dependency by the Tribunal or the multiplier selected.

The appeal, therefore, is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed summarily.