JUDGMENT :

Subhash Chand, J.

1. Heard Sri Mohd. Naushad Siddiqui, learned counsel for appellant and Sri Dinesh Chandra Srivastava, learned counsel for insurance company.

2. This appeal, at the behest of the claimants, challenges the judgment and award dated 02.09.2009 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Court No.16, Kanpur Nagar (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal') in M.A.C.P. No. 560 of 2006 awarding a sum of Rs.9,500/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% as compensation, under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as M.V. Act).

3. The accident is not in dispute. The issue of negligence decided by the Tribunal is not in dispute. The Insurance Company has not challenged the liability imposed on them. The only issue to be decided is, the quantum of compensation awarded.

4. The facts as they are collated go to show that the deceased was having a permanent job. The Tribunal unfortunately did not compute the income, multiplier, had granted Rs.9,500/-. The Tribunal has held that the wife of the deceased Hasim Ali died and son