1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR ORDER S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 4975/2008 {Mahaveer & Another Versus Durga Lal & Others} Date of Order :: 10th December, 2008 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN Mr. Sanjay Gangwar for the appellants BY THE COURT: Heard learned counsel for the appellants. 2. The appellants have preferred this appeal for enhancement of the amount of compensation in respect of death of their mother Chatru, who died in a motor accident took place on 6th March, 2002 and being aggrieved with the impugned award dated 28th June, 2006 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Tonk in Claim Case No. 231/2002, whereby the learned Tribunal has awarded total compensation of Rs. 2,12,200/- with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of claim application in their favour as under: Rs. 1,87,200/- for loss of income Rs. 20,000/- for deprivation of love and affection Rs. 5,000/- for funeral expenses 3. The submission of learned counsel for 2 the appellants is that although the deceased was a lady aged about 50 years but even in the case of child death, the amount of compensation to the tune of Rs. 2,25,000/- is being awarded by Tribunal in these days, therefore, the amount of compensation awarded in the present case is a meager amount and the same is liable to be enhanced, therefore, the impugned award be modified and amount of compensation may be enhanced. 4. I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the appellants in the light of finding recorded by the Tribunal with regard to quantum of compensation. 5. The Tribunal has considered the statement of AW-4 Mahaveer and AW-6 Badri. The learned counsel for the appellants admits that AW-4 Mahaveer has not stated anything about any income of the deceased. AW-6 Badri stated that his mother was earning Rs. 5,000/- to 6,000/- but has not stated specifically whether this earning was monthly or yearly. The learned Tribunal assessed her monthly income as Rs. 1800/- on the basis of minimum wage and after deducting 1/3rd amount out of it for personal expenses, assessed dependency amount as Rs. 14400/- per annum (1200 X 12). It is relevant 3 to mention that even in the case of non earning member, a sum of Rs. 15,000/- has been prescribed in the Second Schedule appended with Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act. Looking to the age of deceased i.e. 50 years, the Tribunal applied the multiplier of 13 and awarded a sum of Rs. 1,87,200/- towards loss of income. Rs. 20,000/- has further been awarded for deprivation of love and affection and Rs. 5,000/- for funeral expenses. 6. After considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, I find that the learned Tribunal was fully justified in assessing the income of the deceased and rightly applied the multiplier looking to her age. The amount of compensation awarded in the present case cannot be said to be a meager amount, as contended by learned counsel for the appellants. The amount of compensation is just, fair and reasonable and no interference in it is called for. 7. In view of above discussion, I do not find any merit in this appeal and the same is, accordingly, dismissed in limine. (NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN),J. DK