JUDGMENT
R.L. Gupta, J.
1. This appeal for enhancement of compensation is directed against the judgment dated 23.8.79 of the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal by which it awarded a sum of Rs. 8100/- only as compensation to the appellants who happen to be the parents of Arvind Kumar, the unfortunate boy who died as a result of accident on 27.5.68 at about 8.30 p.m. within the jurisdiction of Police station Kashmere Gate.
2. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties. There are two questions which require to be determined in the present case. One monthly dependency of the claimants and two, the application of a reasonable multiplier. In this case learned Tribunal has held the monthly dependency at Rs. 75/- only. It has also discussed a number of authorities. The latest authority relied upon pertains to the year 1970. Present trend of authorities, however, is different in such cases. In the case of Subash Rani and others v. Delhi Transport Corporation 1987 ACJ 66 : 1986 (1) ACC 495, the deceased was only 17 years old at the time of accident. This Court held that the boy who was only a B.Sc. student at the relevant time would have earned Rs. 700/- per month and would have contributed Rs. 550/- per month for the benefit of the family. In the case in hand, the deceased at the time of the accident was working as an apprentice in DESU on a monthly stipend of Rs. 50/-. After training his total emoluments would be round Rs. 150/- as has come in evidence, there was an upward revision of pay scales with effect from 1.1.73.
3. I am, therefore, of the view that the estimate of the Tribunal regarding monthly dependency of the deceased is very much inadequate. The monthly dependency, taking all the circumstances into consideration, should have been taken at Rs. 500/- per month at least.
4. The annual dependency, therefore, would come to Rs. 6000/-. Since only a sum of Rs. 75000/- was claimed in this petition, the question of selecting a suitable multiplier seems to lose much significance. It may also be noted that now even after 23 years of the accident the appellants who are the aged parents of the deceased are alive. Taking all the circumstances into consideration, therefore, I am of the view that the compensation claim for a sum of Rs. 75000/- was not at all on the higher side. However, 10% deduction on account of lump sum payment is liable to be made, thus levelling the balance at Rs. 67500/- only. I, therefore allow this appeal and award Rs. 67,500/- as compensation to the appellants with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of the petition till realisation. The balance amount, after adjusting the previous deposit, would be deposited by the respondents within 6 weeks before the Tribunal, who may distribute the same to the appellants in the manner as it deems fit.