( 1 ) SINCE both these appeals involve common question of law and fact, they are heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

( 2 ) THE incident that gave rise to the cause of action for filing of the two claim petitions before M. A. C. Tribunal (South and west) against whose orders/awards both these appeals have been preferred in this court is a vehicular accident that occurred on Legship-Reshi Road, West Sikkim on 10. 10. 2003. It is stated that claimants' son and daughter-in-law who met with death in the said accident were travelling in the ill-fated vehicle which was on its way from Gyalshing to Siliguri on the fateful day. Claimants filed two claim petitions separately in respect of their deceased son late Praveen Kakrania and daughter-in-law late Pragati alias Anita Kakrania before the motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (South and West) at Namchi against Mahendra Pradhan, respondent No. 1 the owner of the vehicle and United India Insurance Co. Ltd. , the respondent No. 2 with whom the vehicle was insured. The claim petition filed in respect of late Pragati alias Anita Kakrania the deceased daughter-in-law was registered as m. A. C. T. Case No. 6 of 2004. The opposite parties resisted the claim by filing separate written objections challenging the maintainability of the claim petition filed by the claimants. In his written objection, the respondent No. 1 contended that the vehicle in question was insured with the respondent No. 2 and that the claim for compensation, if any, lies against the insurance company only. In their written objection, the respondent No. 2 denied and disputed each and everything that 'shall be contrary to and inconsistent therewith from what shall transpire from records'. After recording evidence and hearing the parties, the learned Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs. 1,65,700 as compensation in the following manner. Para 16 of the impugned order which shows how the compensation was worked out is as follows:" (16) It is seen from the claim petition as well as from the deposition of the claimant No. 1 that the income of the deceased Pragati Kakrania was Rs. 6,800 per month. The claim of the claimants on this score remained unchallenged. It is also seen that the claimant No. 1 is 74 years old and the claimant No. 2 is 67 years old. Hence, in my considered opinion the multiplier of 3 can safely be applied in this case. The monthly income of the deceased is Rs. 6,800. Thus, the annual income of the deceased Pragati kakrania comes to Rs. 81,600 (i. e. , rs. 6,800 x 12 = Rs. 81,600 ). Considering the age of claimants and applying multiplier of 3 in this case the amount comes to Rs. 2,44,800 (i. e. , Rs. 81,600 x 3 = Rs. 2,44,800 ). Out of this amount 1/3rd is to be deducted in consideration of the expenses which the victim would have incurred towards maintaining herself had she been alive, which comes to Rs. 81,600 (i. e. , Rs. 2,44,800 + 3 = rs. 81,600 ). Hence, after deducting the sum of Rs. 81,600 out of annual total income of the deceased compensation amount to be paid to claimants comes to Rs. 1,63,200 (i. e. , Rs. 2,44,800 -Rs. 81,600 = Rs. 1,63,200 ). "from the above amount of Rs. 1,63,200, the amount of Rs. 50,000 already paid as interim award was deducted which left the balance of Rs. 1,13,200. The claimant was entitled to get simple interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum on this amount. Over and above this an amount of Rs. 50,000 was awarded as funeral expenses along with further amount of Rs. 2,500 for loss to estate bringing the total amount of compensation awarded at Rs. 1,65,700.

( 3 ) THE claim petition filed by the claimants in respect of Praveen Kakrania, the deceased son, was registered as M. A. C. T. Case No. 4 of 2004. The claim was resisted by the opposite parties more or less on the same ground as in the M. A. C. T. Case No. 6 of 2004 as already narrated above. After recording evidence and hearing the parties, the learned Tribunal granted an amou