In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh F.A.O. No. 2688 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: September 05, 2009 Urmila and others .. Appellants Vs. Gurdev Brahmi and others .. Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: Mr. B.S. Dhillon, Advocate for the appellants. A.N. Jindal, J This appeal for enhancement, directed against the award dated 4.6.2006 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kurukshetra, awarding compensation to the tune of Rs.4,42,000/- along with interest @ 7.5% per annum, in favour of the appellants-claimants, is accompanied by the application for condonation of delay in filing the same. The Tribunal has awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.4,42,000/- on account of the death of Vijay Kumar, aged about 30 years in a motor vehicular accident. The Tribunal after deducting 1/3rd which he was contributing towards himself assessed his income as Rs.2000/- per month i.e. Rs.24,000/- per annum, and after applying the multiplier of 18, awarded compensation. The argument advanced by the learned counsel for the appellants is two fold. Firstly, no compensation has been awarded on account of loss of consortium; secondly, there are six members of the family, therefore, the Tribunal should have made deduction of 1/4th and not 1/3rd as is usually deducted. As regards the multiplier, the Tribunal appears to have applied suitable multiplier in this case. The Tribunal after examining all the factors including the family background strata of the society from which he hails, the amount he must have been spending upon himself and his other societal duties, the deduction towards his own dependency appears to have been rightly made. F.A.O. No. 2688 of 2009 (O&M) -2- Even otherwise, there is delay of 181 days in filing the appeal, which has not been explained. There are no grounds to condone the delay. Consequently, the application for condonation of delay is dismissed. Resultantly, the appeal also fails. September 05, 2009 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge