1. An interesting question has been raised by Mr. Saidur Rahaman, learned Counsel appearing for the appellants, in this appeal, apart from other common issues. The victim was a bachelor. He died in the accident leaving him surviving his parents. As per the voter identification card, the victim was 23 years old and his mother was 36 years old, as claimed by the claimants. Mr. Parimal Kumar Pahari, learned Counsel appearing for the Insurance Company, has raised doubt, and in our view, very rightly.

2. Mr. Rahaman would, however, raised a legal issue as to whether the Tribunal was justified in choosing the multiplier considering the age of the mother and ignoring the age of the victim. He would contend, the decision in the case of Reshma Kumari and Others Vs. Madan Mohan and Another, the Larger Bench discussed the decision in the case of Smt. Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, in v. mode be case and of the to would a should cases as Chandra all said decision Act, U.P. State Road Transport Corporation and Others Vs. Trilok Chandra and Others, (1996) 4 SCC 362 was overruled by implication.

3. On the other issue, Mr. Rahaman would submit, the Trib