Goverdhan Bardhar, J.

1. The instant Civil Misc. Appeal has been filed by the claimants/appellants under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for enhancement of compensation awarded by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Churu (for short 'the Tribunal') vide impugned judgment and award dated 16.06.2000 passed in Civil Misc. (MACT) case No.13/2000 whereby compensation in the sum of Rs.1,90,000/- has been awarded in favour of the claimants/appellants.

2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that on 27.10.1999 deceased Praveen along with one foreigner, Raju Swami and Munnalal were traveling in a Tempo No. RJ 10 P 1201. a Jeep No. RJ 10 C 1784 coming from opposite side being driven by its driver rashly and negligently, hit the Tempo as a result of which all the passengers in the Tempo sustained injuries and due to the injuries, Praveen died.

3. Notices of the claim petition were served on the respondents-non-petitioners and they filed their written statement.

4. On the basis of pleadings of the parties, the learned Tribunal framed five issues including the issue of relief. Both the parties produced their oral and documentary evidence in support of their case.

5. The learned Tribunal after hearing both the parties and taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case, vide its judgment and award dated 16.06.2000 awarded compensation of Rs.1,90,000/- to the claimants/appellants along with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realisation. Hence, this misc. appeal for enhancement of compensation.

6. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the learned Tribunal has committed grave error of law while passing the impugned award as the Tribunal has awarded a meager amount of compensation. The learned Tribunal has wrongly assessed the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.500/-. It is further argued that learned Tribunal has not applied the proper multiplier while computing the compensation. Further it is submitted that amount of compensation awarded in other head is also on lower side and needs to be enhanced suitably.

7. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents has opposed the submissions advanced by the counsel for the claimants/appellants and submitted that the award passed by the learned Tribunal is just and proper and warrants no interference.

8. Heard learned counsel for the parties. I have gone through the record and perused the impugned judgment/award passed by the learned Judge, MACT, Churu.

9. There is no evidence on record with regard to income of the deceased Praveen. The deceased was 25 years old at the time of accident. He left behind parents and one younger brother. The deceased was bachelor. In the claim petition it has been pleaded that the deceased was in the employment of M/s. Jain Tourist Guide & Travels but no salary certificate issued by M/s. Jain Tourist Guide & Travels was produced in evidence. In support of the claim, the claimants have not produced any evidence with regard to regular employment of the deceased. FIR No.342/1999 of the said accident was registered at Police Station Sardar Shahar for offences under Section 297, 337, 304A IPC. During investigation Ex-8 Statement of Paul Anthony, who was traveling in Tempo along with deceased, was recorded. In his statement, Paul Anthony deposed that Jeep driver was driving to jeep rough rash and negligently. He further deposed that he was traveling with deceased Praveen and he had very serious injuries to his head and neck. On perusal of the evidence, it reveals that the deceased was engaged in tourist guide work, but so far as his regular income and employment is concerned, there is no evidence on record. The deceased was 25 years old young man. Though he was not in permanent job on fixed salary but considering the minimum wages prevailing at that time, the learned Tribunal has wrongly assessed the monthly income of the deceased Praveen as Rs.500/-, which could have b