The gratuity, provident fund, and ex gratia payments received by the claimants were not to be deducted from the compensation amount, and the widow's income was not to be adjusted against the compensation.

ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.

( 1 ) THE appeal by the Oriental Fire and General Insurance Company Limited (described in short as 'the insurer') and the cross-objection by claimants who are the dependents of one Krishna Murthy the victim of an accident, question the correctness of an award passed by the Second Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Southern Division Berhampur (in short 'the Tribunal' ).

( 2 ) WHILE the insurer characterises the quantum of entitlement quantified at Rs. 60,000/- to be exhorbitant, the claimants assert that it is on lower side and the entitlement should be enhanced.

( 3 ) THE factual position is almost undisputed. The claimants' case is that on 16-8-1985 a truck bearing registration No. OSS 61 belonging to Taleswar Pandey, respondent no. 7 in this appeal, dashed against the deceased Krishna Murty due to reckless driving causing his instantaneous death; the deceased was working as a peon in the Berhampur University since April, 1977 and continued in the employment of the University till his death; he was getting about Rs. 590/- per month at the time of accident and, therefore, the claimants were entitled to Rs. 1 lakh for loss of contribution for their sustenance. The owner of the vehicle remained ex parte, while the insurer filed objection challenging the plea of reckless driving by the driver of the offending vehicle, and other objections relating to quantum of entitlements. The Tribunal on evaluation of the evidence and the documents pressed into service by the respective parties came to hold that the deceased was getting Rs. 590. 05 per month at the time of his death; taking into consideration the expected life span a multiplier of 16 times could be applied after deducting onethird from the income for personal expenses; the claimants were entitled to get Rupees 75,520/ -. He did not accept the contention that the emoluments received towards gratuity, provident fund etc. were to be deducted from the determined amount; and /or that any adjustment was to be made for the salary of the widow who was given employment on compassionate grounds. But without assigning any further reason, he directed payment of Rs. 60,000/ -.

( 4 ) ACCORDING to the learned counsel for the insurer, the amount received by the claimants towards gratuity, provident fund and ex gratia payment should have been deducted and the Tribunal erred in not deducting the same. According to the claimants, after having quantified the entitlements at more than Rs. 75,000/-, without any basis there should have been no reduction of the amount to Rs. 60,000 /-; the multiplier as adopted is erroneous and, therefore, the quantum as quantified is on the lower side.

( 5 ) THE term "compensation" signifies that which is given in recompense, an equivalent rendered. Damage is distinguishable from compensation, since it constitutes the sum of money claimed or adjudged to be paid in compensation for loss or injury sutained, the value estimated in money of something lost or withheld. The term "compensation" etymologically suggests the image of balancing one thing against other; its primary signification is equivalence. Courts have indicated several modes for assessment of compensation. The three generally accepted modes of determination of compensation are (i) lump sum payment after determining the compensation, taking into account the annual loss of dependency multiplied in estimated life span, after making necessary deduction therefrom; (ii) the multiplier system, where calculation is made on the basis of annual loss of dependency multiplied by a suitable multiplier taking into consideration various factors; and (iii) interest system awarding lump sum to the dependents receipt of an amount by way of interest for the annual loss out of the amount of compensation determined by the Court. It would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case and it is for the Court to adopt any of the aforesaid modes which according to it would work out a just compensation. Th