Hon’ble Ashok Pal Singh, J.—The instant appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act (in short hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) has been preferred by the claimants appellants against the judgment and award dated 11.12.2012 passed by Motor Accident Claim Tribunal/Additional District and Sessions Judge (Ex-Cadre), Court No. 2, Sultanpur in MACP No. 364 of 2011 for the enhancement of compensation awarded.

2. As borne out from the record and hearing of the learned counsel for the parties, the accident in question occurred in the intervening night of 15/16-4-2011 when the truck of respondent No. 1, which was being driven rashly and negligently by respondent No. 2 after having lost control and hitting a tree got overturned. The deceased Rakesh Kumar Sharma and several other persons sitting in the truck became injured. However, the deceased having injured seriously succumbed to his injures while being taken to the hospital. The claimants being the family members and dependents of the deceased presented a claim petition before the Tribunal under Section 166 of the Act. The deceased was stated by them to be aged about 24 years at the time of accident and carrying on a driver’s profession and having an earning of Rs. 15,000/- per month.

3. The tribunal while passing the impugned award recorded a finding about accident having occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the truck. It had also found that the truck had been insured for seven persons in all by respondent No. 1 and that the driver of the truck was holding not only a valid driving licence but the other papers of the truck were also in order.

4. For computing the compensation the tribunal held the age of deceased to be 35 years at the time of accident in place of 24 years as pleaded by the claimants and also declined to accept the income of the deceased to be Rs. 15,000/- per month. It appears that without making any appreciation of evidence of its own about possible income of the deceased and without indicating any multiplier which was required to be used it abruptly assessed an amount of Rs. 1,70,000/- as loss of dependency. To this it added Rs. 2,000/- for funeral expenses, Rs. 5000/- for mental peace and Rs. 2,500/- for loss of estate and awarded a sum of Rs. 1,75,000/- as total compensation payable to the claimants with 6% interest per annum against the respondents fixing the liability of respondent No. 1 Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd. to make its payment.

5. Dissatisfied with the aforesaid amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellants have preferred the present appeal as already stated hereinabove for its enhancement. It would be relevant to mention at this stage that no challenge to the impugned award has been made by the respondents by filing any cross appeal.

6. It is clear from the perusal of the impugned judgment and award that no finding has been recorded by the tribunal about the age, profession and the income of the deceased, which could have been made the basis of calculation of the compensation amount. No effort has also been made by it to take into account the personal living expenses of the deceased. Even, there is no mention of any multiplier. We are at a complete loss to understand as to how calculation has been made of the loss of dependency. In a very strange and cryptic manner it has abruptly fixed the loss of dependency as Rs. 1,70,000/- and proceeded to grant other conventional benefits. The compensation so determined by the tribunal cannot be upheld or sustained in the eyes of law.

7. A fresh calculation needs to be made by us of the compensation, payable to the appellants in view of evidence available on record.

8. As regards the age and profession of the deceased at the time of accident, we find that the driving licence issued by the Licensing Authority, much before his death in the name of deceased, has been filed on record in which his date of birth has been shown as 3.3.86. This document appears to be