1 fa1619 ssp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.1619 OF 2011 United India Insurance Co.Ltd. ...Appellant vs. Alka Dattatraya Jorvekar & Ors. ...Respondents Mr.K.N.Kandekar for the appellant None for the respondents CORAM : A.S.OKA,J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 5, 2011 P.C.: 1 Heard learned counsel for the appellant. The appellant is the insurer of the offending vehicle. A claim was made by the respondent nos.1 to 5 under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act,1988 for grant of compensation on account of death of one Dattatraya. Compensation amount of Rs.2,75,000/- with interest @ 7.5% has been granted by the Tribunal. 2 The only challenge in this appeal is to the quantum of comepensation. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the income of the deceased taken at Rs.3,000/- per month by the Tribunal is on the higher side as there was no evidence adduced for showing the income of the deceased. He submitted that there was no reason for the Tribunal to take notional income of the deceased at Rs.3000/- per month. 3 I have considered the submissions. The finding 2 fa1619 of the tribunal is that the age of the deceased was less than 30 years. Therefore, the multiplier of 17 ought to have been applied. Instead of applying multiplier of 17, the Tribunal has applied multiplier of 11. As there were more than four dependants, deduction of only 1/4th ought to have been made on account of personal expenditure of the deceased in view of the decision of the Apex Court in case of Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation [(2009) 6 SCC page 121]. Therefore, even if notional income is taken at an amount which is much less than Rs. 3000/-, total compensation of Rs.2,75,000/- will be certainly reasonable. 4 Hence, no case is made out for interference. Appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. 5 A sum of Rs.25,000/- deposited in this Court shall be refunded to the appellant. JUDGE