IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Appeal From Order No. 171 of 2008 Smt. Lajjawati & others … Appellants Versus Raj Kumar Sharma & another … Respondents Sri Manoj Sah, Advocate, for appellants Dated: April 29, 2008 Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J. This appeal, under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, has been preferred against the judgment and award dated 31.01.2008, passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Addl. District Judge, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar, in M.A.C. No. 158 of 2006, whereby the Tribunal allowed the claim petition for compensation to the tune of Rs.3,07,000/- against United India Insurance Company. Heard Sri Manoj Sah, learned counsel for appellants on admission and perused the record. Perusal of impugned award reveals that the claimants have come up with the case that at the time of death the deceased had been earning Rs.6000/- per month by working as Electric Mechanic, but no evidence has been adduced by the claimants in this regard. Therefore, in the absence of any evidence, financial dependency of claimants of Rs.30,000/- per annum as has been assessed by the Tribunal, appears to be just and proper. After 2 deducting 1/3rd out of that amount towards personal expenses of deceased, the financial dependency of claimants comes to Rs. 20,000/- per annum. According to the claimants the age of the deceased was 38 years, but post mortem report shows that the age of deceased was 40 years at the time of his death. The Tribunal has accepted the age of the deceased as 40 years. Therefore, keeping in view the age of deceased multiplier of ‘15’ adopted by the Tribunal appears to be just and adequate. After adopting the multiplier of ‘15’ as well as keeping in view the annual financial dependency of the claimants, the total compensation to be awarded in favour of claimants, comes to Rs. 20,000/- x 15= Rs.3,00,000/-. The Tribunal also awarded a sum of Rs.2000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.5000/- towards loss of consortium. Therefore, in my view, the Tribunal has rightly awarded a total sum of Rs.3,07,000/- as compensation and the same does not require any interference. In view of above, the appeal lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, appeal is dismissed in limine. (B.C. Kandpal, J.) SP