JUDGMENT :

The present Appeal is preferred by the appellants who are original claimants. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the judgment and award in Motor Accident Claims Petition No. 582 of 2005 by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux) Mehsana dated 2.1.2007 by which the Tribunal has awarded Rs. 3,46,500/- with 9 % interest per annum from the date of claim petition.

1.1 Brief facts of the present case are as under :

2. That the Honourable Motor Accident Claim Tribunal (Aux), 4th Fast Track Court at Mehsana by his judgment and order dated 2.1.2007 was pleased to partly allow the claim of the appellants. It is the case of the claimants that on 30.7.2005 the deceased Dineshkumar Gangaprasad Jagrid Mistry was going on his motor cycle from Mehsana to Modhara Cross road and when he was driving on his motor cycle on Mehsana Ahmedabad road on the left hand side on tanker driven by the opponent no.1 came from the backside and dashed with the Motor cycle of the deceased and therefore, the deceased Dineshbhai who was aged 22 years at the time of accident he received serious injuries and succumbed to those injuries. At that relevant point of time he was earning his income by doing the work of Carpenter. Therefore, the claimants who are the parents of the deceased have filed their claim petition for compensation from the opponents.

3. The Tribunal has issued notice to the opponents and opponent no.1 and opponent no. 2 though served have not remained present before the Tribunal. Opponent no.3 the Insurance Company of the tanker has appeared and filed the written statement at Exh. 40 by disputing the contents of the claim petition. Respondent no. 4, the owner of the Motor cycle has also appeared through advocate and respondent no. 5 the Insurance Company of the Motor Cycle has appeared through the lawyer has filed the written statement at Exh. 18 and thereafter the Tribunal has framed the issues at Exh. 22 for determination of the claim petition and after recording the evidence more particularly the deposition of the claimants at Exh. 27 who was also cross-examined by the learned advocate for the Insurance Company and after considering the various documentary evidence like FIR at Exh. 30, panchanama at Exh. 21, Insurance policy at Exh. 30 etc. The Tribunal has proceeded further and after hearing the arguments of the respective parties has partly allowed the claim petition by awarding Rs 3,46,500/- with 9% interest by holding the deceased 10% negligent and 90% negligence of the tanker. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the insufficiency of the amount awarded by the Tribunal the claimant has filed the present Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act for enhancement.

4. Learned advocate for the appellants original claimant Mr. Yogendra Thakore has submitted that Tribunal has committed gross error in not awarding sufficient compensation under the different head. He submitted that the Tribunal ought to have considered the income of the deceased at Rs 4000/ which is correctly considered and thereafter adding 40% towards the prospective income in view of the judgment in the case of National Insurance Company Limited Vs Pranay Sethi reported in (2017) 16SCC 680 and deducting 1/2 of that amount, the amount will remain Rs 2,800/- which for the yearly dependency will come to Rs 33,600/- and looking to the age of deceased the multiplier which is given by the Tribunal is 15 which is erroneous which is requried to be awarded 18 in view of the judgment of Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121 and Pranay Sethi(supra). He has further submitted that therefore the amount of dependency benefit will be more then which is awarded by the Tribunal. He has further submitted that the Tribunal has not awarded any proper and reasonable amount under the head of loss of consortium and funeral expenses. He has further submitted that under the head of loss of estate no amount is awarded and therefore, he has prayed that in view of