The Motor Vehicles Act emphasizes just compensation, which must be fair, reasonable, and equitable based on the circumstances of each case.

1. The present first appeals, under S.173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, are preferred by the appellants - original claimants, being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned common judgment and award dated 4.10.2022 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Main) Bhavnagar, in Motor Accident Claim Petition Nos. 317 of 2018 and 318 of 2018, by which, in both the captioned petitions, the Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.10,20,200 with 9 per cent per annum interest to the claimants, holding the opponent Nos. 1 to 3 liable, jointly and severally, and petition against opponent Nos. 4 and 5 is dismissed.

2. Brief facts of the case are as under.

2.1 The brief facts of the case are that on 11.8.2018 the claimants of the respective claim petitions had boarded the Swift car bearing registration No. GJ - 4 - CR - 4186 driven by the deceased of MACP No. 318/2018 and they were going to Ahmedabad, and, at this time, the deceased of the MACP No. 318 of 2018 was driving the said car at a moderate speed and on his correct side, however, when the said car reached at the spot of occurrence of the accident in question, the opponent No. 1 came driving the tanker vehicle bearing No. RJ - 27 - GA - 6673 from the opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner endangering human life and lost control over the steering of the said vehicle. As a result of the same, the said vehicle came on the wrong side and dashed with the car in which the claimants were travelling due to which the claimants (sic) deceased of the respective claim petitions succumbed to the injuries sustained by them.

2.2 Notices were served to the opponents. Opponent No. 3 - insurance company has filed its written statement at Exh. 23 by disputing all the averments made by the claimants in the claim petitions. Opponent No. 4 has appeared and filed his written statement at Exh. 32. Opponent Nos. 1 and 2 have appeared and filed written statement at Exh. 32 and opponent No. 5 has filed its written statement at Exh. 35. They have denied all the averments made by the claimants in the claim petitions.

2.3 The Tribunal has framed the issues. The oral as well as documentary evidence were led by the rival parties before the Tribunal. After considering the various documentary as well as oral evidence and submissions made at the Bar, the Tribunal has partly allowed the claim petition by awarding compensation as noted above.

2.4 Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the present appeal has been preferred by claimants before this court for enhancement of compensation.

3. Heard learned advocates appearing for the respective parties.

4. Learned advocate for the appellants - claimants has submitted that the Tribunal has committed an error in not properly calculating the amount of compensation. He has submitted that amount of award is on lower side as the Tribunal has not properly considered various aspects like prospective income of the deceased, loss of consortium of life, etc. He has submitted that the deceased was a student and he was having aim for government job. The income of the deceased should be considered Rs.15,000 at least. He has fairly submitted that the learned Tribunal has rightly considered the prospective income, deduction of personal expenses looking to the age of the deceased and multiplier. He has submitted that therefore, considering the loss of dependency, it would be calculated as Rs.15,000 as monthly income plus Rs.6,000 as 40 per cent prospective income minus Rs.10,500 as personal expenses (1/2) multiplied by 12 months and multiplied by 18 multiplier would come to Rs.22,68,000 being total future loss which should be awarded to the claimants by the learned Tribunal. He has also submitted that towa