BHASKAR BHATTACHARYA, J.

(1) This appeal is at the instance of claimants in a proceeding under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act and is directed against an award dated 7th November, 2003, passed by the learned Judge, Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, South 24-Parganas at Alipore in M.A.C. Case No.762 of 2001 thereby disposing of the proceeding by awarding a sum of Rs.7,37,000/- as compensation to the claimants with a direction upon the Insurance Company to pay the said amount within a specified date. It was further stipulated in the award that in case of default of payment of the said amount within the date fixed, the amount would carry interest @ 10 percent per annum from the date of application till payment.

(2) Being dissatisfied, the claimants have come up with the present appeal.

(3) There is no dispute about the involvement of the offending vehicle in the accident resulting in the death of the victim and the fact that such vehicle was insured by the Oriental Insurance Company Limited. There is also no dispute that the victim was aged 31 years at the time of death and was a qualified school teacher in a High School having educational qualification of B.Sc (Hons) in Zoology and also M.Sc in the said subject. The claimants are the widow, minor daughter and the mother of the victim.

(4) The owner of the vehicle did not contest the proceeding. The Insurance Company, however, by taking leave under section 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act contested the said proceeding but did not adduce any evidence of its own. It has been proved from the salary certificate exhibited in the proceeding that the victim had gross salary of Rs. 10,313/- at the time of death and that he used to pay annually a sum of Rs. 8,451/-as income tax as it appeared from Exhibit 14. The Tribunal below, therefore, held that after the various deductions other than Income Tax, the net salary of the victim was Rs.9,786/- and thus, the yearly income was Rs. 1,17,432/-. After deduction of the Income Tax of Rs.8,451 /- the amount came down to Rs.1,08,981 /- and that was treated to be the annual income of the victim for the purpose of the assessment. The learned Tribunal below, thereafter, deducted one-third of such amount as the personal expenses of the victim and after deducting the one-third of such amount, a sum of Rs.72,654/- was treated to be the amount available for the benefit of the claimants. The learned Tribunal below, consequently, having regard to the age of the victim applied the multiplier of 10 and arrived at a figure of Rs.7,26,540/- and further added Rs.10,460/-as symbolic recognition of the agony suffered by the claimants. The total amount, thus, was assessed to be Rs.7,37,000/-.

(5) Being dissatisfied, the claimants have come up with the present appeal.

(6) Mr. Maity, the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant, at the outset, submitted before us that the victim being a permanent teacher of a secondary school having a good educational background, the learned Tribunal below ought to have considered the future prospect of the victim. According to him the compensation should be assessed not on the basis of actual income of the victim at the time of accident but a notional figure which should be at least the double the said amount should be treated to be the annual income of the victim inasmuch as he had 30 years of secured service still left. Mr. Maity further submits that there was no justification of applying the multiplier of 10 for the death of a victim aged 31 years only. Mr. Maity further contends that the learned Tribunal below should have awarded interest on the awarded amount from the date of filing of the application till actual deposit without making any stipulation of default on the part of the Insurance company to pay the same within a specified period as condition for grant of interest. He, therefore, prays for setting aside the order impugned by enhancing the same with interest on the basis of at least double the a