IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL A.O. NO. 421 OF 2007 1- Smt. Bhagwati @ Bhakti W/o Mahipal R/o Lakshar Ward No.2, Nagar Panchayat Lakshar, District Haridwar. 2- Mahipal S/o Mukh Ram R/o Lakshar Ward No. 2, Nagar Panchayat Lakshar, District Haridwar ……. Appellants. Versus 1- Rai Bhadur Narayan Singh Sugar Mill Ltd. through its Manager Mr. J.M. Sharma, S/o Pyare Lal Sharma, Rai Bahadur Narayan Singh Sugar Mill Ltd. Lakshar, District Haridwar. 2- National Insurane Company, through its Divisional Manager, Divisional Office, National Insurance Company, Near Jamuna Palace, Haridwar, Tehsil & District Haridwar … Respondents. Mr. Jagdish Singh Bisht, learned counsel for the appellant. Mr. Manish Dalakoti, holding brief of Mr. D.S. Patni, Advocate for Insurance Company. Mr. Sharad Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1. Dated: 28-02-2008 Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J. This appeal, under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, has been preferred by the claimants for enhancement against the judgment and award dated 6- 6-2007, passed by Motor Accident Claim Tribunal/District Judge, Haridwar, in M.A.C. Case No. 85/2005, whereby the claim petition was allowed for compensation of Rs. 1,65,000-00 along with an interest @ 5% per annum from the date of presentation of the petition against the National Insurance Company. 2- Brief facts of the case, giving rise to this appeal, are that on 30-5-2005 when deceased Monu was going to Lakshar, Jeep bearing registration No. U.A.- 08-D-9891 hit him due to which Monu died instantaneously at the spot. The claimants, who are parents of the deceased, filed claim petition with the allegations that the accident had occurred due to rash and negligence on the part of the driver of the jeep, the deceased was 17 years of age at the time of accident and was earning Rs. 4,500/- per month from the plumber work. 3- O.P.No.2 owner of the vehicle filed written statement before the Tribunal and alleged that the accident has occurred due to own fault of Monu and the vehicle was insured with National Insurance Company, hence liability to pay the compensation is of the insurer. 4- The Insurance Company also filed the written statement and alleged that the accident had occurred due to own fault of the deceased and the vehicle was being driven against the terms of the insurance policy. 5- The learned Tribunal framed the relevant issues and after having considered the evidence adduced in the case, awarded a compensation of Rs. 1,65,000/- along with an interest @ 5% per annum to be paid by the insurer. 6- Being dissatisfied with the award, the claimants have preferred this appeal for enhancement. 7- Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 8- Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the Tribunal fell in error by not considering the monthly income of the deceased and wrongly calculated the compensation on notional income. He urged that monthly income of Rs. 4,500/- shown in the petition be taken for assessment of the compensation. 9- I do not find any substance in the above submission raised by the learned counsel for the claimants/appellants. Although the claimants in the claim petition has noted the monthly income of the deceased as Rs. 4,500/- but no documentary evidence was filed in this regard. The contention of the claimants was that the deceased used to do the plumber work and on the date of the accident he was going to do the work in Sugar Mill. The claimants could file certificate of income of the deceased. There is only interested statement of the claimant on record. In the aforesaid circumstances the Tribunal was justified in rejecting the contention of the claimants and fixing notional income of Rs.15,000/- for assessing the compensation. The Tribunal has deducted 1/3 of the notional income towards personal expenses of the deceased. The age of the deceased at the time of accident was 17 years and the Tribunal has rightly adopted the multiplier of 16 for assessing the dependency of the claimants. I, therefore, do not find any illegality on the point of quantum. 10- Learned counsel for the appellants also submitted that the Tribunal has awarded low rate of interest and urged that the same be enhanced. He also submitted that the Tribunal has passed order to deposit Rs. 1,50,000/- in fixed deposit in some nationalized bank or Post Office for a long period of 15 years, which is on higher side. 11- To me it appears that the Tribunal has awarded interest on the lower side and the rate of interest should be enhanced. 12- For the reasons recorded above, the appeal lacks merit and accordingly is dismissed. 13- However, as far as the interest part is concerned, it seems to be on lower side. Therefore, the award is modified to the extent that the interest awarded by the Tribunal should be 9% per annum instead of 5% per annum. Further the Tribunal has also directed that out of awarded amount, Rs. 1,50,000/- should kept in fixed deposit with some National Bank or Post Office for a period of 15 years which also appears to be on higher side. This part of impugned award is also modified to the extent that the amount should be kept in some Nationalized Bank for a period of 10 years instead of 15 years. (B.C. Kandpal, J.) ISB