JUDGMENT
Bhawani Singh, C.J.
1. This appeal is directed against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bhopal, in Claim Case No. 17 of 1998, dated 14.5.99.
2. The accident took place on 10.11.95, at 6 p.m. When deceased Anurag Shrouti (22) was going on his scooter from Bhopal to Govindpura, he was hit by tanker bearing registration No. MBD 8593. He died instantaneously. The allegation is that the tanker was being driven rashly and negligently by Badshah Khan (driver). The vehicle is owned by Pipaiyamal, respondent No. 2 and insured with National Insurance Co. Ltd., Bhopal. Deceased was freelance photographer. He was earning Rs. 5,000 per month, out of which he spent Rs. 1,000 on himself and left Rs. 4,000 for maintenance of the family. He was a healthy young man of 22 years. Compensation of Rs. 15,50,000 has been claimed under various heads mentioned in the claim petition along with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum.
3. The respondent No. 3 has not admitted the claim. It is stated that the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 committed a breach of insurance policy conditions, therefore, it was not liable to pay compensation. It is also stated that accident took place due to contributory negligence of the parties.
4. The Claims Tribunal has come to the conclusion that accident took place when deceased Anurag Shrouti was hit by the tanker No. MBD 8593, driven rashly and negligently by the driver. Compensation of Rs. 2,52,000 has been awarded along with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from 25.4.1997. The claimants are not satisfied with the award, therefore, this appeal has been filed for enhancement of compensation.
5. Learned Counsel for the parties heard and record perused. There is no dispute about taking place of accident. Finding with respect to award of compensation has been assailed by the claimants, father and mother of the deceased.
6. Mr. Mandosh Mishra, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of appellants, submits that the Claims Tribunal has not awarded just compensation. The dependency has not been properly worked out nor proper multiplier is applied. Mr. Vishal Dhagat, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the insurance company, submitted that looking to the nature of evidence, compensation has been properly awarded, therefore, no enhancement of compensation is called for.
7. We find that the deceased was young man of 22 years of sound health. He was the only son of the claimants. He had furnished income tax return for Rs. 1,44,141 with net income of Rs. 29,061.70. It was filed on 31.3.1995 and the accident took place on 10.11.1995. Therefore, it would not be wrong, in case the income of the deceased is fixed at Rs. 4,000 per month. Out of it, he must be spending 1/3rd on himself, leaving Rs. 2,600 for family. The proper multiplier in this case would be 17. Thus counted, the compensation works out to (Rs. 2,600 x 12 x 17) Rs. 5,30,400. The claimants shall also be entitled to Rs. 5,000 for loss of expectancy of life and Rs. 2,000 for funeral expenses, taking the total compensation to Rs. 5,37,400. The enhanced compensation will carry interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum from 25.4.1997 till payment, which may be made within two months.
Costs on parties.