AKIL KURESHI J.

( 1. ) SINCE the accident had taken place nearly 13 years back in the year 1999 and since the Claims Tribunal had awarded compensation which in our opinion was extremely conservative, we had taken up this appeal for final hearing at the admission stage with the consent of the learned advocates appearing for the contesting parties as was recorded previously in our order dated 14.3.2012.

( 2. ) THE appellants original claimants have challenged judgement and award dated 10.12.2010 passed by MACT(Aux.) Gondal, Camp at Jetpur in MACP No.1239/1999. Brief facts may be noted at the outset.

(2.1) One Girdhar @ Girish was travelling on his motorcycle on 5.9.1999 going from Wankaner to Mendarda village. In the afternoon at about 2:30, when he was passing Jetpur-Junagadh highway and had reached Junagadh Marketing yard, a Matador bearing registration No.GJ-1-TT-9761 coming from the opposite side went on the wrong side and dashed against the motorcycle. He was thrown off the motorcycle, received serious injuries. He was taken to Government hospital at Jetalpur, where he was declared brought dead.

(2.2) It seems that in front of motorcycle, a rickshaw was going. Matador hit the rickshaw first before hitting motorcycle. Rickshaw driver filed FIR which was produced at exh.34. In the FIR, the rickshaw driver Hasanbhai stated that matador was coming from opposite direction at high speed. Matador first hit his Chakdo rickshaw. He was thrown on the road side. Thereafter, the matador had also hit the motorcycle coming behind him. The claimants had also produced panchnama of scene of accident at exh.35. It recorded that matador after hitting the motorcycle had dashed against a tree on the wrong side of the road.

(2.3) The claimants who were the widow of the deceased, two minor children and his aged parents filed above-mentioned Claim Petition claiming compensation of Rs.40 lakhs from the owner and insurer of the motorcycle involved in the accident.

(2.4) Deceased was aged about 34 years on the date of accident. He was working as a storekeeper in Gujarat Electricity Board and was posted at Wankaner. The claimants produced his last salary slip and other documents to show that his income was more than Rs.8000/- per month. Tribunal believed the income of the deceased at Rs.8081/- and after granting 50% rise for future income and thereafter, setting apart 1/3rd for personal expenditure of the deceased, calculated the dependency benefits of the claimants at Rs.8041/- per month.(Which is a minor calculation error and correct figure should have been Rs.8081/-.)

(2.5) Before the Tribunal, the opponents pointed out that the widow of the deceased was given compassionate appointment by GEB and she was receiving regular salary. The Tribunal calculated net income of the wife of the deceased at Rs.7000/- per month. The Tribunal therefore, believed that the dependency benefits of the family should be only Rs.1041/- (i.e. Rs.8041 ? Rs.7000). On such residual amount of Rs.1041/-, the tribunal applied multiplier of 16 and worked out the dependency benefits of the family at Rs.1,99,872/-. The tribunal granted Rs.10,000/- towards loss of consortium to the wife and Rs.10,000/- towards loss of estate. The tribunal added further sum of Rs.2500/- towards funeral expenses and thus awarded a total sum of Rs.2,22,372/-

(2.6) Widow and minor children have therefore approached us by filing the present appeal seeking enhancement in the compensation. It is pointed out that minor Meet Girdharbhai having died he is deleted from the cause title.

( 3. ) ON the basis of evidence on record, counsel Shri Sheth for the appellants vehemently contended that the tribunal erred in adopting sum of Rs.8041/- as income available to the family of the deceased. He submitted that there were periodical pay revisions applied by the employer. Such pay revisions also ought to have been taken into account.

( 4. ) IN particular counsel submitted that the tribunal committed gross erro