JUDGMENT

Nidhi Gupta, J..

This common order shall dispose of cross appeals bearing FAO No.5357/2014 filed by claimants, as well as FAO No.1757/2014 filed by Respondent Insurance Company, both appeals arising out of Award dated 30.11.2013 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Patiala (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') passed in MACT No.14/13.6.2011 filed under section 166 of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT . For the sake of convenience and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the facts are being noticed from FAO No.5357/2014, which are even otherwise common.

2. The claimants in FAO 5357/2014 are seeking enhancement of compensation of Rs.9,35,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. Claimants are Gagandeep Kaur widow of deceased Tejinder Singh; Raminder Singh and Maninder Singh both twins and minor sons; and Mukhtiar Kaur and Balbir Singh parents of the deceased-Tejinder Singh.

3. Learned Tribunal on the basis of the pleadings of the parties and evidence led by them concluded that deceased Tejinder Singh had died due to injuries suffered by him in a motor vehicular accident that took place on 3.6.2017 due to rash and negligent driving of Tractor bearing registration No. PB-11L-3008 (hereinafter referred to as 'the offending vehicle') owned by Sanjay Kumar-Respondent no.2. Ownership of Sanjay Kumar over the offending vehicle was established in view of the fact that the said vehicle was got released by him on superdari by showing his ownership to the Court. It has further come on record that Gora Lal-Respondent no.1 only used to take offending vehicle from Sanjay Kumar as a Contractor. The offending vehicle was insured by Respondent no.4-National Insurance Company.

4. At the time of the accident the age of the deceased was taken as 23 years on the basis of his Driving Licence which is Mark-A wherein his date of birth is mentioned as 25.4.1987. Income of the deceased was taken as Rs.5000/- per month on the reasoning that as per Jamabandi Ex.C-16 the deceased owned agricultural land and in the absence of the deceased the claimants 1,2 and 3 being widow and minor sons of the deceased would have to engage services of someone to look after the land, who would not charge anything less than Rs.5000/- per month. Accordingly, in this view of the matter the learned Tribunal has taken the income of the deceased to be Rs.5000/- per month. Keeping in view the number of dependents, deduction of 1/4th has been made and keeping the in view the age of the deceased, multiplier of 18 has been applied. Rs.20,000/- has been awarded on account of loss of love and affection; funeral expenses to the tune of Rs.5000/-; Rs.1 lac has been awarded to the widow only on account of loss of consortium. Accordingly, total compensation of Rs.9,35,000/- along with interest @ 7.5% per annum has been awarded by the Tribunal.

5. The offending vehicle was found to be registered and insured in the name of Respondent no.2. Accordingly, the owner and insurer of the offending vehicle were held liable to pay compensation jointly and severally. However, Respondent no.4-Insurance Company was afforded right to recover compensation amount from Respondent no.2-Sanjay Kumar as the name of the driver was never disclosed by him nor his driving licence was brought on record.

6. FIR No.217 dated 4.6.2013 Ex.C8 and charge sheet Ex.C11 have also been registered in the matter which duly prove the accident. The driver of the offending vehicle is stated to be absconding and untraceable.

7. It is inter alia submitted by the learned counsel for the claimants/appellants that learned Tribunal is in error in making deduction of 1/4th on account