ingle Bench 'iosaheb Deshmukh —————-—_,J M 6 iscenageousAppeal (C 1N0 170 of 00 alat1 Bax /o Nohar Smgh Sah ed about 20 year ajanand €510 Sa a h ged about 44 years _ ewantm Bal W/o Gajanand S ed abo 43 years ura} Kuma' Sia Nohar Smgh Sah ged about 1-month Aellant No 4 i lega guardian mothe R/o WI Malpun os istt Burg (C E‘ esgbtiden‘ts ’ gn-Aggiimn -. Pt: u resen he mount of enhancement t ’ HIGH Cou§ o cHHA 1' _ ‘T LAsP + r 1s _ 4‘ A BiuR ‘ I ' s J ___ -:M Wd u g s 1‘ VG maru Rm Sau a .l ,D ahu g . S u a pp s l r’ V H pt' D G) "' Nts vq'L/ I l . ‘ , I} 11$ i 7 i i ‘ V > Compensation of Rs 3 29 5OOI- by award date‘d 25-03-2006 in a case'of accidental death of Nohar Smgh aged 28 years The claimants are the i Widow mmor child and parents of the deceased The tribunal assessed yearly loss of dependency at R520 OOOI- and a plied multlpller of 16 and ' awarded Rs 3 20 0001- towards loss of dependency The tribunal further awarded a sum of Rs 9 500i- under other conventlonal heads ‘ '(3) The sole ground urged by Shn S C Verma learned counsel for the I; appellants Is that m View of the age of the deoeased belng 28 years onx the date of accrdent multiplier of 18 ought to have been applied while assessing loss of dependency. No other pomt was urged. (4) Shri/Sudhlr Agrawal, learned counsel for respondent No.3iinsurer argued in support'of the impugned award: ' t (5)” l Having heard rival submissions i haveé'perused the record. Since ithe Widow and minor child of the deceased were claimants and the deceased was aged 28 years multiplier 18 was applicable under the 7 ‘ . ,V second schedule irrespective of the fact that the parents of the deceased were also arrayed as claimants ln this View of the matter loss ofv dependency ought to have assessed by the tribunal at RS360 000/- - i.e.,Rs.20,000/- multiplied by'18. Addingto this, an amount of Rs.9,500/— ‘ towards conventional heads, compensation] of Rs.3,69,500i— ought to have been awarded. l i:v 7 (6) In the result the appeal Is allowed In modification of the award i I passed by the tribunal compensation of R3369 500l- is awarded against the insurer. A Sd-/ " Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh ’ V Judge