JUDGMENT :

K. M. Thaker, J.

1. This appeal was admitted by order dated 3.9.2007. At the request of the appellant and with the consent of the opponent the appeal is taken up for hearing and final decision today.

2. Present appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 22.2.2007 passed in Motor Accident Claims Petition. No. 630 of 1995 whereby the learned Tribunal has awarded Rs. 2,72,640/- towards compensation with interest at the rate of 9%. The appellants - heirs and the legal representatives of the deceased Mr. Jayendrabhai Bhatt - had preferred the said claim petition, claiming Rs. 10.00 lacs towards compensation, with interest and other components. The claim was raised in view of the death of Mr. Jayendrabhai Bhatt on account of the accident which occurred on 10th March 1995.

3. The facts relevant for the purpose of present appeal are that Mr. Jayendrabhai Bhatt (hereinafter referred to as the deceased ) was going to Limbdi in the State Transport bus bearing registration No. GJ-1Z-4604. While the bus was on the way from Gandhipura Patiya, a truck bearing registration No. GJ-4T-6848 collided with the S.T. bus. In the said accident the Mr. Bhatt sustained fatal injuries and died on the spot. The claimants alleged that the truck, which was on the wrong side of the road dashed with the S.T. bus. The deceased, who held qualification of B.S.M.A., was working in Homeopathy Hospital as Medical Officer and at the time of accident his age was 54 years and he was drawing gross salary of Rs. 8,815/- as per the last pay certificate issued by his employer. Subsequently the widow and his two sons filed the aforesaid claim petition.

4. In pursuance of the notices issued by the learned Tribunal the opponent No. 2 G.S.R.T.C. had appeared and opposed the application by filing its reply and had disputed the allegations made by the claimants. The respondent No. 2- G.S.R.T.C. asserted that the driver of the truck was negligent and rash in his driving and the accident occurred solely due to the negligence of the truck driver. The opponent No. 5- Insurance Company (insurer of the truck) also had filed its reply below (exhibit 36) disputing the averments and allegations made by the claimants. After recording evidence and upon considering the contentions of the contesting parties the learned Tribunal ascribed 50% negligence to the driver of the S.T. bus also, holding both the vehicles equally negligent. The learned Tribunal, after taking into account the relevant details and evidence regarding the age of the deceased, his income applied multiplier 6 and after allowing certain deductions from the deceased s gross salary, assessed his income at Rs. 3,620/- and on that basis the learned Tribunal awarded Rs. 2,60,640/- towards loss of income, Rs. 10,000/- towards loss of estate and Rupees 2,000/- towards funeral expenses totaling Rs. 2,72,640/-.

5. Aggrieved by the said award the appellants have preferred present appeal claiming enhancement in the awarded amount.

6. Mr. Hiren Modi learned advocate has appeared for the appellant and Mr. Majmudar learned advocate has appeared for the opponent No. 5 Insurance Company. Though process has been served on opponent No. 2-G.S.R.T.C. no one has entered appearance. So far as the driver of the GSRTC bus is concerned he was deleted from the proceedings during the proceedings before the learned Tribunal and the appellants have, in present proceedings sought leave to delete the driver of the truck i.e. opponent No. 3. The owner of the truck has not filed appeal and has not challenged the finding of the learned Tribunal ascribing negligence at the rate of 50% to the driver of the truck hence the request to delete the opponent No. 3-driver is granted.

7. Heard the learned Counsel of the contesting parties. Mr. Modi learned advocate for the appellant has submitted that the learned Tribunal has erred in determining the multiplier and has also committed error in assessing the deceased s income/loss of income. Mr. Modi h