23 S.B. CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO. 59/2007 (Smt Vidhya Devi Vs. Champalal & Ors.) Date of Order :: 11th January 2007. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI Mr. M.L. Khatri, for the appellant. ..... Having heard learned counsel for the claimant-appellant and having perused the impugned award dated 03.04.2006 in Claim Case No. 209/2002 this Court is satisfied that this appeal for enhancement of amount of compensation remains bereft of substance and does not merit admission. For quantification of compensation for the mother of the vehicular accident victim Smt. Chandu, about 50 years in age, the Tribunal has noticed the submissions of the claimant that the deceased had been deserted by her husband nearly 40 years back and she was living with her mother (claimant) and was earning about Rs. 2,000/- to 2,500/- per month by tailoring job work; and for want of any cogent evidence on record, has taken her monthly income at Rs. 2,100/- and deducting one- third wherefrom and with application of multiplier of 5 in view of the age of the claimant at about 65 years, has assessed pecuniary loss at Rs. 84,000/-. In the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has not considered proper to allow any other component of loss and has awarded compensation in the sum of Rs. 84,000/- together with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of claim application, after adjustment of the amount of Rs.50,000/-, if received under interim award. In the fact situation of the present case, where the deceased was about 50 years in age and was living with her mother who was about 65 years of age at the time of accident and no proof of earnings of the deceased has been adduced; the estimate put by the Tribunal on her earning at Rs. 2,100/- per month cannot be said to be insufficient; and rather it stands much in excess of the notional income of a non-earning person. Then, the Tribunal has proceeded to assess pecuniary loss taking two-third of the estimated earning of the deceased as contribution to the mother. Assessment so made is definitely on the higher side. In the family set up as stated before the Tribunal, contribution from the deceased to her mother could not have been taken more than one-half of her estimated income. Application of multiplier of 5 is also to the maximum looking to the age of the mother-claimant at 65 years. The Tribunal has of course not awarded any amount towards non-pecuniary loss and funeral expenses but when viewed in the context of the other error by the Tribunal in awarding higher amount on pecuniary loss for the mother of the victim, in the ultimate analysis, the award amount cannot be said to be too low or inadequate than that of just compensation; and there appears no scope for upward revision in this appeal. The appeal fails and is, therefore, dismissed summarily. (DINESH MAHESHWARI), J. Mohan/