Hon’ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra, J.—The present appeal has been preferred by the husband and his four sons, challenging the award of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal dated 17.2.2011 passed in M.A.C.P. No. 533 OF 2003, awarding Rs. 2,29,500/- as compensation, on account of death of Smt. Rajmati Yadav on 27.10.2002 and have sought enhancement of compensation. The award of the tribunal has been accepted by the respondent- UPSRTC and no appeal has been preferred by it.

2. On 27.10.2002 at about 4.15 p.m., when the appellant No. 1 alongwith his wife Smt. Rajmati Yadav who was a pillion rider on a scooter bearing registration No. UGD-1598 was coming from Chinhat Bazar towards his house, the driver of the roadways bus bearing registration No. UP-32 0077 dashed the scooter from behind due to rash and negligent driving. On account of that accident, the appellant No. 1 and deceased Smt. Rajmati Yadav sustained serious injuries. When deceased was taken to the medical college, she was declared to be dead. Son of the appellant No. 1, namely Devendra Kumar Yadav, who was coming behind the scooter, was present on the spot and has seen the incident. He admitted his father-mother in the hospital and on 28.10.2002 he informed in writing to the police station Chinhat, upon which a first information report was lodged. Claim under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act was raised by the husband and his four sons against the respondent- UPSRTC with the allegation that the deceased was a hale and hearty lady, and was operating a PCO, by which she earned Rs. 2,500 per month. Under different heads amount of compensation of Rs. 9,02,000/- was claimed.

3. The respondent- UPSRTC has contested the claim and by filing written objection it is stated that the accident in question was not caused by its bus and the claim has been raised only on the fake and frivolous facts in order to obtain compensation and, therefore, the claim is liable to be rejected.

4. The tribunal on the basis of respective pleadings of the parties framed four issues.

5. Issue No. 1 was regarding the question as to whether on 27.10.2002 at about 4.15 p.m. at Saket Filling Centre in front of Faizabad Road Lucknow, the driver of roadways bus bearing registration No. UP-32 0077 dashed the scooter from behind due to rash and negligent driving, and on account of which Smt. Rajmati Yadav, who was sitting on the scooter, died due to injuries sustained in the accident and Hansnath Yadav sustained injuries. This issue was decided by the tribunal and a finding was returned that the death of the deceased Smt. Rajmati Yadav was caused due to rash and negligent driving of the roadways bus bearing registration No. UP-32 0077 in the manner, as claimed.

6. Issue No. 3 was to the effect that whether the claim petition is barred by the provisions of rule 3(1) of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, 1967. This issue was considered and decided by the tribunal in favour of the claimants-appellants. Issue No. 2 and 4, regarding entitlement of compensation of the claimants, were answered by the tribunal in favour of the claimants-appellants.

7. Claimants-appellants have not produced any certificate regarding income of the deceased at Rs. 2,500/-. Tribunal after assuming the income of the deceased as being not less than Rs. 100/- per day, accepted the income of the deceased as Rs. 2500 per month. After appropriating 1/3rd towards her personal and living expenses, the loss of dependency has been determined as Rs. 20,000/- per annum. Since no evidence has been led or filed regarding age of the deceased, tribunal relying upon the postmortem report in which age of the deceased was held to be 54 years, applied multiplier of 11. Loss of dependency was fixed at Rs. 2,20,000/-. Further sum of Rs. 5,000/- towards loss of consortium, Rs. 2,500 towards funeral expenses and Rs. 2,500/- towards loss of estate, quantifying the total compensation at Rs. 2,29,500/-.

8. In the instant case, the deceased was the wife of claima