1 S.B.CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO.1094/2001. Smt.Mamta. VS M/s.Mountain Movers Pvt.Ltd. & Ors. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR ORDER S.B.CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO.1094/2001. Smt.Mamta. VERSUS M/s.Mountain Movers Pvt.Ltd. & Ors. 10.11.2009. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE DALIP SINGH Mr.Ashish Sharma on behalf of Mr.Mahendra Goyal, for the appellant. Mr.Sandeep Taneja on behalf of Mr.P.S.Shukla, for the respondent No.2. ***** Heard learned counsel for the parties. The claim was filed by the appellant on account of the death of her husband Babulal who died in a motor accident on 22.10.1999. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the learned Tribunal had determined the age of the deceased Babulal as 25 years while deciding the issue No.3 but in spite of this, the learned Tribunal adopted a multiplier of 15 only whereas at least a multiplier of 18 ought to have been adopted in terms of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Smt.Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another reported in 2009 (6) SCC 121 and further that the learned Tribunal has failed to award interest on the amount of compensation from the date of accident till the date of realization. 2 S.B.CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO.1094/2001. Smt.Mamta. VS M/s.Mountain Movers Pvt.Ltd. & Ors. I have considered the aforesaid submissions and I find that there is substance in the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant. Taking the age of 25 years, as determined by the learned Tribunal, it would be safe in the facts and circumstances of the present case to adopt a multiplier of 17 as provided under the second Schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. On the basis of the above, the loss of earning of the appellant, annual dependency determined by the learned Tribunal, would come to Rs.16,000/- X 17 = Rs.2,72,000/-. The learned Tribunal under this head had awarded an amount of Rs.2,40,000/- which has been paid to the claimant. The aforesaid amount of Rs.2,40,000/- is liable to be deducted and the appellant is entitled to an additional amount of Rs.32,000/- under the aforesaid head. The appellant would also be entitled to the interest on the amount of Rs.32,000/- w.e.f. the date of filing of this appeal i.e. 14.03.2001 upto the date of realization. The second contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the learned Tribunal has not awarded interest to the claimant while passing the award and has only provided for payment of interest in the event of delayed payment. So far as the aforesaid contention is concerned, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Chameliwati Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation reported in 1985 ACJ 645 has held that the claimants are entitled to the 3 S.B.CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO.1094/2001. Smt.Mamta. VS M/s.Mountain Movers Pvt.Ltd. & Ors. interest from the date of application till the date of payment @ 9% p.a. on the amount awarded by the learned Tribunal from the date of application till its realization. In view of the above, the appellant herein would be entitled to the aforesaid amount of interest as well as enhanced amount of Rs.32,000/- + interest @ 6%, as indicated above. This amount shall be paid by means of demand draft in favour of the claimants before the learned Tribunal. Consequently, this appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent. There shall be no order as to costs. (DALIP SINGH),J. Solanki DS, Jr.P.A.