S. B. Wad ( 1 ) THIS is an appeal filed by M. C. D. against the award of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Delhi, dated 16. 2. 1979. The Tribunal had held that deceased Bakht Ram died due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of D. T. U. (now D. T. C.) bus in a road accident on 13. 7. 1970. The Tribunal had awarded a sum of Rs. 55,867. 00 and interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum, if the award amount was not paid within two months. Cross-objections are filed by the heirs of Bakht Ram. ( 2 ) ON 13. 7. 1970, Bakht Ram going on his motor cycle DLM 5262, accompanied by his munshi Wazir Chand from Malviya Nagar to Govind Puri via Kalkaji to attend his work on site where his labour were waiting for him. The deceased was a contractor. When they were near b Block crossing near Kalkaji, the D. T. C. bus No. DLP 632 came from behind at a fast speed and hit the motor cycle from behind. Due to the impact Wazir Chand, munshi, fell on the right side and the motor cycle towards the left. Mr. Bakht Ram was caught in between the motor cycle and the bus. The bus dragged Bakht Ram and the motor cycle upto a distance of 9 to 10 feet and then stopped. Bakht Ram was seriously injured. He was taken to the Safdarjung Hospital where he died the next day. ( 3 ) THE claimants had examined 3 eye-witnesses namely, Bhana Ram Public Witness 3, Kahan Singh Public Witness 4, and Wazir Chand Public Witness 13. Wazir Chand was the most important witness because he was riding on the pillion with the deceased and was directly involved in the accident. The police had also taken the photographs immediately after the accident and they are exhibited at Public Witness 13/1. ( 4 ) THE Tribunal mainly relied on the evidence of Wazir Chand and found that it was corroborated by the other two witnesses, Bhana Ram and Kahan Singh. The Tribunal further found that the version of the claimants was fully supported by the photographs exhibited in the proceedings. The Tribunal also found that since the bus had hit the motor cycle from behind resulting in serious injuries and death of Bakht Ram, the facts speak for themselves. The Tribunal further found that the version of the claimants was fully supported by the photographs exhibited in the proceedings. The Tribunal also found that since the bus had hit the motor cycle from behind resulting in serious injuries and death of Bakht Ram, the facts speak for themselves. On the basis of the photographs, the Tribunal found that the version of the accident given by the driver of the bus, Jagir Ram (RW 1) was falsified. Jagir Ram had stated that the motor cycle was trying to overtake the bus from the right side. It hit the bus and lost balance. The death was caused by the negligence of the motor-cyclist. This version was rejected by the Tribunal. The counsel for the parties have taken me through the evidence on record. The counsel for the appellant could not show me any material on record for disbelieving the eye-witnesses. It was stated that Bhana Ram and Kahan Singh were not examined by the police and that they were not likely to be present at the time of the accident. Simply because the police could not contact the said witnesses does not render their evidence untrustworthy. The Tribunal has found that there are no material contradictions in their evidence. The findings of the Tribunal are fully supported by the evidence on record and I fully concur with them. The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur directly applies in this case. The impact of the bus coming from behind was so heavy that Bakht Ram almost instantaneously died. I hold that death of Bakht Ram was caused by rash and negligent driving by the driver of the bus in question. There is no merit in the appeal filed by the M. C. D. and that appeal is therefore dismissed. ( 5 ) THAT takes us to the cross-objections of the claimants. The Tribunal had awarded compensation of Rs. 55,867. 00. The claimants had claimed Rs. 7,20,000. 00as compensation and interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of the filing of the petition. Bakht Ram was working as a contractor with D. D. A and C. P. W. D. He was an approved contractor with both the agencies. He was taking building contracts as also the road contracts and development of land. Bakht Ram was working as a contractor with D. D. A and C. P. W. D. He was an approved contractor with both the agencies. He was taking building contracts as also the road contracts and development of land. At the time of the death, 4 contracts were running with the D. D. A. Public Witness 11 Ram Krishan is an Officer of the D. D. A. From the record brought in the court he had stated that in the year 1967-68 Bakht Ram was awarded contract of the value of Rs. 1,77,376. 00 In 1968-69 he was given contracts of the value of Rs. 1,24,878. 00 and Rs. 29,110. 00 in respect of the development in Okhla Development Industrial Tenements Blocks a and b . In the year 1969-70 he was awarded contracts in the sum of Rs. 87,949. 00, Rs. 67,758. 00, Rs. 37,028. 00, Rs. 20,607. 00 and Rs. 6,177. 00 regarding various roads and culverts. Another Officer, Nanak Chand Public Witness 12, had told that in the year 1968-69 Bakht Ram was given contracts worth Rs. 2,88,359. 00. He was class III contractor and work upto Rs. 2. 00 lakhs could be given to him. According to Wazir Chand Public Witness 13 who was working as the munshi of the deceased, the margin of profit on the said contracts was between 18 per cent and 20 per cent. Wazir Chand has further stated that the monthly income of the deceased was between Rs. 2,000. 00 to Rs. 2,500. 00 after deducting all expenses. From the evidence produced by the D. D. A and the C. P. W. D. it is clear that the deceased was working out contracts worth about Rs. 2. 00 lakhs every year. Even if the profit is taken at 10 per cent his annual income would come to about Rs. 20,000. 00. Marvi Bai, the widow of the deceased husband, has stated in her evidence that he was contributing about Rs. 1,000. 00 every month for the family maintenance. The Tribunal had come to the conclusion that his yearly income would be Rs. 8,000. 00. It is rather difficult to know the basis for the same. From the evidence on record there is no reason to doubt the statement of the widow that he was contributing about Rs. 1,000. 00every month to the family. The Tribunal had come to the conclusion that his yearly income would be Rs. 8,000. 00. It is rather difficult to know the basis for the same. From the evidence on record there is no reason to doubt the statement of the widow that he was contributing about Rs. 1,000. 00every month to the family. The dependency can therefore be safely taken at Rs. 10,000. 00 a year. Mr, Bakht Ram was only 33 years old at the time of his death. It can very safely be assumed that he could have worked for at least 20 years more and supported his family. On the basis of the multiplier of 20 the compensation would work out to Rs. 2. 00 lakhs. The Tribunal by a queer calculation came to the conclusion that the monthly dependency would be only at Rs. 350. 00. The approach is wholly erroneous and is, therefore, rejected. Mr. Bakht Ram left behind his widow and 4 children. The youngest child was of 9 months and the eldest of 10 years. The Tribunal has not considered the fact that Mrs. Bakht Ram had a responsibility to educate the children and marry two daughters. The Tribunal also erred in making a number of deductions. The widow had received a sum of Rs. 25,000. 00 on the pending bills from the D. D. A. after the accident. This amount can be deducted but the computation of Rs. 7,000. 00 as the value of the house in which the family was living and to deduct the said amount was quite untenable. The Tribunal has also erroneously deducted a sum of Rs. 16,800. 00 towards the lump sum payment and uncertainties of life. It is now fairly established that rising prices and inflation have reduced the real value of a rupee to only 20 per cent. Considering this fact no deduction should be made for lump sum payment and uncertainties of life. After deducting a sum of Rs. 25,000. 00 as stated, I hold that the claimants are entitled to compensation of Rs. 1,75,000. 00 They are also entitled to 9 per cent simple interest from the date of the petition till realisation. The M. C. D. is directed to draw up a cheque for the compensation amount and interest and deposit it with the Registrar of this court within 3 months from today. 1,75,000. 00 They are also entitled to 9 per cent simple interest from the date of the petition till realisation. The M. C. D. is directed to draw up a cheque for the compensation amount and interest and deposit it with the Registrar of this court within 3 months from today. The Registrar shall call the claimants and personally disburse the amount. Cross-objections are allowed.