The court upheld the application of the multiplier in calculating compensation, affirming the principles established in relevant case laws.

1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and award dated 29.4.2009 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Auxi.), Jamnagar in MACP No. 23 of 2008, the insurance company has preferred this appeal under S.173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').

2. It is the case of the claimants that deceased Jayvirsinh Gajubha Jhala was on duty as ASI in Traffic Branch of Jamnagar Police near Bypass Four Cross Road at Jamnagar at about 6.40 p.m. on 22.5.2007. It is further the case of the claimants that while on duty, a truck bearing registration No. GJ 11 - T 9703 was being driven by the driver from Lalpur Chaukari side in a rash and negligent manner and while the deceased was on duty of the security of His Excellency, the Governor of Gujarat, at the place of the accident, it ran over the deceased, because of which the deceased sustained serious injuries and was admitted to J.J. Hospital at Jamnagar and ultimately succumbed to injuries. The F.I.R. was lodged with ' B' Division Police Station Jamnagar being CR - I No. 87 of 2007 and the present claimants had filed the claim petition under S.166 of the Motor Vehicles Act and claimed compensation of Rs. 25,00,000. It was the case of the claimants that the deceased was aged about 47 years and was working in the Police Department and was earning Rs. 10,000 in aggregate by way of salary as well as agricultural income of Rs. 82,000 to Rs. 90,000 per year and one of the claimants - wife of the deceased was examined at Exh. 53 and also relied upon one Yasinmohammed Hussain Bhatti, the junior clerk of the DSP office, Jamnagar at Exh. 56 and also relied upon the documentary evidence such as page Nos. 4 and 5 of the impugned judgment and award:

3. The Tribunal having appreciated the evidence of panchnama at Exh. 47 and charge - sheet at Exh. 48 came to the conclusion that the driver of the truck was solely negligent. While computing the income of the deceased, the Tribunal appreciated the evidence in the form of payslip at Exh. 29 and the revenue records at Exhs. 32 and 33 and came to the conclusion that monthly income of the deceased from salary was Rs. 9,415 and also considered Rs. 1,500 as supervisory loss of agricultural land and thus determined the income of the deceased at Rs. 10,915 per month and after deducting 1/3rd towards personal expenses and applying multiplier of 13, awarded a sum of Rs. 11,35,056 as compensation towards loss of dependency and also awarded Rs. 25,000 as loss of love and affection, Rs. 15,000 as loss of consortium, Rs. 3,000 as funeral expenses and thus awarded total compensation of Rs. 12,15,316 with 9 per cent interest from the date of filing of the claim petition.

4. Being aggrieved by the same the insurance company has preferred the present appeal and the original claimants have preferred cross - objection for enhancement of the claim.

5. Heard Mr. Ankit Patel for Ms. Lilu K. Bhaya, learned advocate for the appellant insurance company, Mr. Kaash Thakkar for Mr. V.H. Kanara, learned advocate for the original claimants, and Mr. Manan Bhatt, learned advocate appearing for respondent Nos. 6 to 6.2. Though served, none appears for the other respondents and have also perused the original record and proceedings.

6. Mr. Ankit Patel, learned advocate for the appellant insurance company, has contended that though in the written statement the contention was taken that the driver of the truck did not possess a valid and effective licence, the said contention has not be