IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL. A.O. No. 793 of 2006 Smt. Rekha Rani and 4 others .. Appellants. Versus Kshitij Sharma and another .. Respondents. Mr. G.C. Lakhchaura, learned counsel for the appellants. Mr. P.C. Maulekhi, learned counsel for the respondent No.2. Dated: 31-7-2008 Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J. This appeal, under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1973, has been preferred against the judgment and award dated 1-9-2006, passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/District Judge, Udham Singh Nagar, in MACT Case No. 104/2005. 2- Brief facts of the case, giving rise to this appeal, are that on 11.2.2005 deceased Yashwant Singh along with Satish Verma was going Gadarpur to participate in a marriage riding in motorcycle No. UA-06- B 4356. Yashwant Singh was driving the said motorcycle and Satish Verma was pillion rider. In the night at about 11 P.M. when they reached near Bahalla bridge, Maruti Van UP 25-F-4258 coming from Bazpur side in a high speed dashed the motorcycle due to which Yashwant Singh was injured seriously. He was brought to the Hospital, where he was declared dead by the doctors. The deceased at the time of accident was 40 years of age and he was employed as Assistant Teacher in Primary School, Teela, Jaspur. His monthly salary was Rs. 10,134/-.The claimants filed petition for a sum of Rs.50,00,000/-. 3- The opposite party No.1 owner of offending Maruti Van contested the petition by filing his written statement and alleged that at the time of accident his 2 vehicle was insured with New India Assurance Company and its driver had valid driving license. 4- The opposite party no.2, New India Assurance Company also contested the claim petition and filed its written statement. The Insurance Company denied the allegations made in the petition. It further alleged that the acceded had occurred due to own fault of motorcyclist and the Maruti Van had no fault in causing the said accident. 5- The learned Tribunal, on the basis of pleading of parties, framed relevant issues in the petition. Thereafter, parties adduced evidence in support of their case. The Tribunal on hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the material on record, allowed the claim petition for compensation to the tune of Rs. 9,07,000/- along with interest @ 5% per annum from the date of filing the petition till the date of actual payment against the New India Assurance Company. 6- Feeling aggrieved the claimants have preferred this appeal before this court for enhancement. 7- Heard learned counsel for the claimants/appellants and the learned counsel for the Opposite Party/respondent, insurance company and perused the record. 8- Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the learned Tribunal has committed a manifest error in deducting an amount more than 1/3rd towards personal expenses of the deceased from the monthly salary of the deceased. He also submitted that 3 the Tribunal has awarded the interest on lesser side and it should also be enhanced. 9- On the other hand learned counsel for the insurance company has submitted that the Tribunal has adopted the multiplier on higher side at the age of 40 years and the same should be reduced. 10- From perusal of finding recorded by the learned Tribunal, it reveals that the Tribunal has deducted a sum of Rs. 4,478/- towards personal expenses from the monthly income of the deceased which is certainly more than 1/3rd. The monthly salary of the deceased after usual deduction was Rs. 9,478/-, rounded to Rs.9,500/- and after making 1/3rd deduction towards personal expenses of the deceased, the net dependency of the claimants comes to Rs.6,300/- per month, the annual being Rs. 75,600/-. The deceased at the time of his death was 40 years of age and the Tribunal has adopted a multiplier of ‘15’, which is certainly on higher side in view of the pronouncement of Hon’ble Apex Court in the matters of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. vs. Smt. Kalpana and others, reported in 2007(1) Supreme 514; Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd. vs. S. Rajapriya & Ors, reported in 2005(4) Supreme 87, and The Managing Director, TNSTC Vs. Sripriya & Ors., reported in 2007(5) Supreme 301. In my opinion the proper multiplier in the instant case would be ‘13’. Therefore, after adopting a multiplier of ‘13’ the total compensation comes to Rs. 75,600/- x 13 = Rs. 9,82,800/-. The learned Tribunal also awarded a sum of Rs. 2,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs. 5,000/- towards loss of consortium, and in my opinion the claimants are entitled to get these amount. Therefore, the 4 total compensation comes to Rs. 9,82,800/- + Rs. 2,000/- + Rs. 5,000/- = Rs. 9,89,800/-. 11- Further the Tribunal has awarded interest @ 5% per annum which in my opinion is certainly on lesser side and the justified rate of interest would be 7.5% per annum, from the date of filing the petition till the actual date of payment. 12- For the reasons recorded above, the appeal is liable to be partly allowed. 13- Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed. The impugned judgment and awarded dated 1-9-2006 is modified upto the extent that the claimants are awarded a sum of Rs. 9,89,800/- as compensation along with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing petition till the actual date of payment payable by New India Assurance Company, instead of Rs. 9,07,000/- along with interest @ 5% per annum, as has been awarded by the tribunal concerned. (B.C. Kandpal, J.) ISB