- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR -------------------------------------------------------- CIVIL MISC. APPEAL No. 258 of 1996 SMT. GAVRI DEVI & ORS. V/S SURENDAR SINGH & ORS. Mr. PK BHANSALI, for the appellant / petitioner Mr. SANJEEV JOHARI, Mr.RK MEHTA, for the respondent Date of Order : 8.2.2008 HON'BLE SHRI N P GUPTA,J. ORDER ----- This appeal is filed by the claimants against the award of the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No.1, Jodhpur dated 16.12.95 for enhancement of the compensation. The learned Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs.1,18,800/- alongwith interest at 12%. Since the question involved is only of quantum, I need not go into other factual aspect. The relevant necessary facts are, that the deceased was serving as a peon in the Cooperative Department and was 47 years of age at the time of accident. He was getting Rs.1389/- per month by way of salary, and according to the claim petition, he was contributing Rs.1000/- per month to the family. The claimants are mother, widow and 3 minor children. The accident relates to 23.7.90. - 2 - The learned Tribunal found the dependency of the family to be Rs.900/- per month, and finding that had he not died, he would have served for another 11 years, and thus, employing multiplier of 11, loss of income has been assessed at Rs.1,18,800/-. Then loss of consortium and love and affection has been assessed at Rs.15,000/-, but then deduction has been made on account of payment of lump-sum amount to the extent of Rs.15,000/-, and award of Rs.1,18,800/- has been made. I have gone through the statement of claimant Gawari Devi, P.W.1, who has deposed that her husband was getting Rs.1300/- per month for which a certificate has been produced. She has further deposed that she was being given Rs.1000/- for the house-hold, and that the deceased was also enjoying his part of the life from the household expenses of Rs.1000/- itself. In such circumstances, in my view, the assessment of the learned Tribunal about dependency of the family cannot be found fault with. Then coming to the multiplier, looking to the present trend of the judgments of Hon'ble the Supreme Court, the multiplier is excessive, as in the name of multiplier, the entire remaining period of service has been taken into account for calculating loss of income. As such, there is no further scope of employing any higher multiplier, therefore, the compensation assessed under the - 3 - head of loss of income can also not be found fault with. Learned Tribunal has made a deduction of Rs.15,000/- on account of lump-sum payment, while in my view, when the compensation has been assessed by multiplier basis, then such deduction on account of lump-sum payment, cannot be made, therefore, this part of the deduction is required to be set aside. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed, and the deduction made by the learned Tribunal under the head of lump-sum payment to the extent of Rs.15,000/- is set aside, and the award is enhanced from Rs.1,18,800/- to Rs.1,33,800/-. Rest of the terms of the award are maintained. ( N P GUPTA ),J. /tarun/