IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Appeal From Order No. 251 of 2009 With Delay Condonation Application No. 6244 of 2009 Smt. Veerwati and others ...Appellants Versus Smt. Rubi and others …Respondents Sri Pooran Singh Rawat, Advocate for appellants Dated: 23-07-2009 Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J. (Oral) Heard Sri Pooran Singh Rawat, learned counsel for applicant on Delay Condonation Application and perused the affidavit filed in support thereto. Delay Condonation Application is allowed. The delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned. Also, learned counsel for the appellant at length on admission and perused the impugned judgment and award. This appeal, under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, has been filed by the claimants before this Court for enhancement of amount of compensation. After having considered the entire material available on record and hearing learned counsel for the appellant, I am of the view that impugned judgment and award does not suffer with infirmity. The learned Tribunal in absence of any cogent and 2 reliable evidence with regard to income of deceased has rightly taken into account the notional income of deceased as Rs.36,000/- per annum, which after deducting one-third towards personal expenses, has been worked out to Rs.24,000/- per annum. The multiplier of ‘15’ selected by the Tribunal keeping in view the age of deceased, appears to be a just and proper multiplier in this case. The amount awarded by the Tribunal under other heads also appears to be completely justified and needs no interference. As far as interest part is concerned, the same also appears to be justified and does not require any interference. Therefore, appeal lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, appeal is dismissed in limine. The impugned judgment and award dated 21.03.2009 is hereby confirmed. (B.C. Kandpal, J.) SP