( 1. ) THIS appeal is filed by the claimants-appellants against the award dated 6. 2. 2006 passed by Second Additional Motor accidents Claims Tribunal, gwalior in Claim Case No. 66 of 2005 for enhancement of compensation. The Tribunal by the said impugned award awarded compensation amounting to Rs. 3,21,500 and held that the owner and insurance company are liable to pay the amount of compensation along with interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from the date of filing of claim petition.

( 2. ) THE insurance company, respondent no. 2, raised an objection before Claims tribunal that original driving licence issued in favour of the driver was fake and, therefore, insurance company is not liable to indemnify the insured. The said objection was rejected by the impugned award dated 6. 2. 2006 and, therefore, after receipt of notice of the memo of appeal, insurance company filed the cross-objection in this appeal.

( 3. ) BRIEF facts of the case are that on 27. 7. 2003 a truck bearing registration No. MP 07-G 0724 was driven by Major Singh. He was driving the truck and going via nashik to Mumbai, suddenly front side tyre of driver side bursted, due to which driver of the truck lost his control and dashed it with another truck bearing registration no. MH 30-A 9237. The driver major Singh who was driving the truck bearing registration No. MP 07-G 0724 sustained grievous injuries and during his treatment died at Civil Hospital, Shahpur.

( 4. ) APPELLANTS who are the legal heirs of the deceased Major Singh filed a claim petition claiming compensation amounting to Rs. 19,40,000 on the ground that the deceased was working as a driver and his monthly salary was Rs. 3,000 plus diet allowances. Daljeet Kaur, AW 1, widow of the deceased Major Singh in her statement stated that at the time of death the deceased was 35 years of age and he was getting salary at the rate of Rs. 3,000 per month. The salary certificate, Exh. P12, was duly proved by respondent No. 1. Appellant No. 1 in the claim petition shown her age as 33 years. Her age was shown on 13. 5. 2003 as 34 years. She in her cross-examination also admitted that no document was filed in respect of age of her husband. Claims tribunal also found that the mother of the deceased is 73 years of age, as per affidavit filed by her and, therefore, considering the age of the mother of the deceased as well as the age of the appellant No. 1 held that the deceased was not less than 45 years of age at the time of his death. In post-mortem report, Exh. P7, the age of the deceased is shown as 40 years. Considering the above, the Claims Tribunal held that the deceased was 45 years of age at the time of his death. The Claims Tribunal in respect of income of the deceased on the basis of evidence on record came to the conclusion that the deceased was earning Rs. 3,000 per month, i. e. , Rs. 36,000 per annum and after deducting 1/3rd towards his personal expenses the annual dependency of the appellants comes to Rs. 24,000 and on applying the multiplier of 13 the compensation comes to Rs. 3,12,000. The Claims tribunal also awarded Rs. 9,500 towards funeral expenses, loss of consortium, etc. Thus, the total amount of Rs. 3,21,500 was awarded towards compensation to the claimants.

( 5. ) THE age of Daljeet Kaur, AW 1, is 33 years and in the post-mortem report the age of the deceased was mentioned as 40 years. Considering the above, it can be safely held that the deceased was 40 years of age and as such as per Second Schedule framed under section 163-A of the Motor vehicles Act, 1988, the multiplier of 15 would be applicable and on applying the multiplier of 15 (i. e. , Rs. 24,000 x 15 = Rs. 3,60,000)the compensation is determined at Rs. 3,60,000. Appellants will be entitled further sum of Rs. 9,500 towards damages under various heads such as loss of consortium, funeral expenses, etc. Thus, the total compensation is determined at rs. 3,69,500 (rupees three lakh sixty-nine thousand five hundred ). Claima