1. - This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 03.05.1999 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rajsamand ('the Tribunal'), whereby, for the death of one Dheeraj Murdia, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 8,84,000/- as compensation alongwith interest @ 12% per annum from the date of filing application for compensation ('the application') i.e. 05.03.1992.

2. The facts in brief may be noticed thus: The claimants - wife, children and parents of the deceased filed the application, inter alia, with the averments that while travelling from Udaipur to Ajmer on 29.08.1991 at around 10.45 AM, the vehicle in which the deceased alongwith his co-passengers was travelling, met with an accident with a Tanker bearing Registration No.DGI 7608, being driven rashly and negligently by its driver, which resulted in grievous injuries to the said Dheeraj Murdia to which he ultimately succumbed.

3. The claimants claimed compensation to the tune of Rs. 79,98,000/-. A reply to the application was filed by the Insurance Company disputing the averments contained therein and disputing its liability as well.

4. The Tribunal framed four issues and came to the conclusion that the accident occurred on account of rash and negligent driving by driver of the Tankar - Abhay Singh and the Insurance Company was liable to make payment of the compensation.

5. While assessing the amount of compensation, the Tribunal relying on the statements of AW-4 Smt. Mandakani, wife of the deceased and AW-5 Pratap Singh, father of the deceased, came to the conclusion that the deceased was aged about 38 years and based on the income-tax documents filed at Exhibit 4 to 14, assessed the loss of income at Rs. 8,000/- per month; deducted Rs. 1,600/- for personal expenses + Rs. 400/- for conveyance expenses; applied multiplier of 12 and awarded a sum of Rs. 8,64,000/- towards loss of income, Rs. 15,000/- towards loss of consortium and Rs. 5,000/- towards conveyance expenses.

6. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the compensation awarded is meager, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case as the deceased was an Engineering Graduate and was a bright young businessman involved in several ventures. On account of his untimely death at the age of 36 years, the business as being carried on by him has been severely effected inasmuch as one of the companies were required to be sold out by the claimants and, therefore, the Tribunal was not justified in assessing the income at Rs. 8,000/- per month only. It was further submitted that the deduction of Rs. 400/- towards conveyance expenses has no basis as admittedly the deceased was working with several companies and, therefore, there was no question of his spending Rs. 400/- personally for conveyance expenses. Submissions were made regarding non-consideration of future prospects and low multiplier as well.

7. Reliance was placed on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation, (2009) 6 SCC 121 : AIR 2009 SC 3104 and Syed Basheer Ahmed and Ors. v. Md. Jameel and Anr., (2009) 2 SCC 225 : AIR 2009 SC 1219 , in support of the contentions.

8. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company submitted that the award of compensation is just and reasonable in the facts and circumstances of the case. The Tribunal has thoroughly considered the facts & circumstances and based on the income-tax returns of the deceased, the assessment has been made and as such the same does not call for any interference.

9. I have considered the rival submissions. From the material placed on record, it is apparent that the deceased Dheeraj Murdia was an Engineering Graduate and was involved in several businesses and was in fact travelling in connection with his new business of setting-up of a dealership of Telco vehicles.

10. From the statement, it is also noticed that father of the deceased Pratap Singh was aged 65 years at the time of the death of his so