1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR O R D E R S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.296 of 2001. Badami wife of Bhanwra and Others VERSUS Mamchand son of Shri Shriram and Another Date of Order :::: 10/11/2009 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dalip Singh Mr. Rakesh Bhargava, Counsel for the Appellants Mr. Virendra Agarwal, Counsel for the Respondents *** By the Court : Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the award passed by the learned Tribunal. The submission of the learned counsel for the appellants is that while determing the compensation in claim case No.310 of 1994, arising out of the death of Banshi Ram, the learned Tribunal took into consideration the notional income of deceased as Rs.15,000/-. But made a deduction of Rs.3,500/- and took the dependency of the family as Rs.11,500/- and adopting a multiplier of 14 calculated the amount of compensation as Rs.1,61,000/-. 2 Learned counsel for the appellants relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Smt. Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, reported in 2009 (6) S.C.C 121 contended that the age of the deceased being 48 years and as per the Schedule, the multiplier of 14 cannot be adopted and the multiplier of 13, which is prescribed for the person within the age group of 45- 50 years alone could be adopted. In that view of the matter, the compensation for loss of earning is assessed as follows : (15000x13) = Rs.1.95,000/-. Less amount already paid Rs.1,61,000/-. The appellants are entitled to get enhanced amount of Rs.34,000/- (1,95,000–1,61,000) (Rupees thirty four thousand only) under the head of loss of earning. The said amount shall be paid with interest @ 6% per annum with effect from the date of filing of this miscellaneous appeal i.e. 04.05.1999 up to the date of its realization. The miscellaneous appeal stands allowed with the aforesaid extent. There will be no order as to costs. (Dalip Singh), J. ashok/