1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI M. A. No. 397 of 2014 Uma Chandran, W/o Late G. Ram Chandran, R/o G-1 No.16 Torsa Apartment, 4th Phase, Alok Vihar, Ghhorabandha, P.O. & P.S.Chhotagovindpur, Town Jamshedpur, Singhbhum East, Jharkhand. .... .. ... Appellant(s) Versus 1.Mr. Anish Trehen, S/o Sri Hari Om Trehen, R/o Dimna Road, Mango, Town Jamshedpur, Singhbhum East. 2.The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. through its Local Divisional Office at Kamani Centre, Bistupur, P.O. & P.S. Bistupur, Jamshedpur. .. ... ...Respondent(s) ........... CORAM :HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY ......... For the Appellant (s) : Mr. Zaid Ahmed, Advocate For the Resp. No.2 : Mr. G. C. Jha, Advocate …... 11/ 06.02.2025. Heard, learned counsel for the parties. 1. The claimant/ appellant has preferred the instant Misc. Appeal for enhancement of Award under Section 163A of the M.V. Act passed by learned District Judge- III- cum- MACT, Jamshedpur, in Compensation Case No.179 of 2011. 2. As per the case of the deceased (G. Ram Chandran) died in a motor vehicle accident caused by vehicle/ truck bearing Registration No.BPS 8226 which was under the insurance cover of New India Assurance Comp. Ltd. (Respondent No.2). 3. Learned Tribunal recorded a finding that the deceased died in a motor vehicle accident involving vehicle/ truck bearing Registration No.BPS 8226 and at the time of accident, he was earning Rs.2100/- per month as he was working as Welder. However, learned Tribunal deducted 1/3rd as the living expense of the deceased and taking a monthly dependency of Rs.1400/- and by taking multiplier of 15, awarded compensation of Rs.2,50,000/- along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of claim case. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the claimant/ appellant that the income of the deceased was a sum of Rs.3,500/- per month and evidence to that effect was also led on behalf of the claimant, but the same has been discarded, without assigning any specific reason. Further, under the Conventional head, a sum of Rs.40,000/- only has been awarded, but the same is not in accordance with the ratio laid down by Hon’ble the 2 Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi, reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680. 5. I find force in the argument advanced on behalf of the Insurance Company that since the claim application had been filed under Section 163A of the M. V. Act and the impugned Award has been passed in accordance with the Second Schedule of Section 163A of the M.V. Act, therefore the appellant cannot claim compensation under Section 166 of the MV Act. There is no infirmity in the computation of award, by the Tribunal. 6. However the Appellant is entitled to compensation of Rs. 70,000/- under the conventional head as per the ratio laid in Kurvan Ansari Vs Shyam Kishore Murmu, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 1060. 7. The Respondent No.2- Insurance Company is directed to deposit the difference amount before the learned Tribunal and thereafter the same be disbursed to the claimant within two weeks thereafter. The instant Miscellaneous Appeal is accordingly allowed with enhancement under the conventional head. (Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.) Sandeep/