/I o' c< ;QRAM; H< \~'t SHI C-laimants Gendram Sahu, aged about 46 years, Son of Late Shri Kanhaiyalai Sahu 2 Smt Sita Bai, aged about 44 years, Wife of Shri Gendran- i. Rampvari Sahu, aaed about 20 years, D/o Shri Gendram Sahu Deepak Kumar Sahu, aged about 15 years, Son of Shri Gendram Sahu, Minor throuah his natural auardian father Shri Gend Ram Sahu Atl residents of Viliage Ghoramar, Tahsii Takhatpur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) Chhannu Singh Kshatri Son of Shri J.S. Kshatri, aged about 44 years. Resident of L.I.G. - 4, Rajendra Prasad Nagar, Korba, District Korba (C.G.) i' Vehicle Owner) Jaaendra Sinah. aaed about 33 'sars, yon OT n snravan oingn, resident of Power House Korba, District Korba (C.G.) (Driver) The Nationa! Insurance Company Limited, Korba, Through : Branch ier, National Insurance any Limited, . Vyapar Vihar Road, BiIaspur(C.G.) (insurer) •^"r-! >(JEI iT ' i • Shri P.P. Sahu and Shri S.P. Sahu, learned counsel ror the appeliants. Shri Arun Shukla, learned counsel for respondent No.1. Shri Sudeep Agrawal, learned counsel for rsspondent 3 >th The foliowing order of the Court was passed by [ajeev Gupta, C.J. ' Learned counsel forthe parties are heard pn admission. 2) The appeilants ars seekina enhancement of the compensation awarded by 4 Additional Motor Accident C-Iaims Tribunal, Bilaspur (for short 'the Tribunai') vide award daied 07.01.2006, passed in Claim Case No.71/2005. 3) As against the compensation of Rs.34,35,000/- claimed by the appellants/ claimants, unfortunate parents, younger sisier and brother of deceased Mahesh Kumar, by filing a claim petition under Section 366 of the Motor Vehicles Act for his death in the motor accident on 29.06.2005, the Tribuna! awsrded a tota! sum of Rs.3,93,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from ths date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actua! payment. 4) Shri P.P. Sahu and Shri S.P. Sahu, learned counsel for the appellants vehementiy argued that the Tribunal has erred in not acceDtina the ciaimants' svidence about the income of the deceased and in assessina his income at Rs.3,000/- per month and ^ <s.36,000'- per annum only; in seiecting the lower multiplier of 15; and in awarding low compensation of Rs.3,93,000/- only. 5) The ciaimants pteaded that deceased Mahesh Kumar used to get salary of Rs.3,000/- per month by working In Prem Music Shop at Balco and in addition he used to earn Rs.7,000/- per month from agriculture. The Tribunal in para 19 of the award has considered the entire evldence led by the claimants about the income of the deceased. The agriculturai land in the revenue papers was recorded in the name of the father of the deceased i.e. claimant No.1 Gendram Sahu. T'ne Tribunai, therefore, accepted the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased at Rs.3,000/- per month and assessed his income at Rs.3,000/- per month and Rs.36,000/- per annum. 5) On due consideration of the submissions of learned counsei for the appellants and perusal of the claimants' evidence about the income of the deceased, we are satisfied that t'ne assessment of income of the deceased bv the Tribunal at Rs.3,C H- month and Rs.36,000/'- per annum does not suffer from any infirmity whatsoever. 7) Th* Tribunal has been quite iiberal in deducting only 1/3 of the income ofthe deceased towards his personalexpenses though ,the deduction in that behalf couid have been to the extent of 50% of the income of the deceased as on the date of the accident the deceased was unmarried and after his marriage his contribution to the parents, sister and brother vvould have been reduced substantia!!y. 8) The multipiier of 15 selected by the Tribunal is rather on the higher side in view of the dic-tum of the Apex Court in the case of mQther, reported in SCC-731, wherein it was held that in those cases where the claimants are parents of the deceased the multiplier should never exceed 1 0. 9) We, th.erefore, do not find anv scope for enhancement of the compensation awarded bythe Tribunal. 10) The appeal, therefore, is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed summarily. Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge Chief Justice r' SUbDU