JUDGMENT The claimant in this appeal has challenged the findings of the Tribunal only in respect of the low assessment of the income of the deceased, assessed by it at Rs. 250/- per month and her so assessed dependency at Rs. 75/- per month as also of the rate of interest of 6% per annum, allowed by the Tribunal on the early payment of awarded amount. On the above counts, the enhancement of the award of Rs. 18,000/- is prayed with the further prayer of incase in the rate of interest at 12% per annum without any of the conditions. Held: From the evidence on record, there was no basis for the Tribunal to arrive at the finding that the average income of the deceased was Rs. 250/- per month. His income even on the lowest side could not be assessed less than Rs. 300/- per month. Coming next to the question. of amount of dependency and compensation, it may be seen that there can be no exact uniform formula for measuring the value of the human life and to set a standard to determine the dependency and quantum of compensation. The law relating to compensation does not expect but directs the Court to impart justice within the four corners of law according to the needs of the litigants without the undue weight to the technicalities of law and base its orders on equity. The dependency of the claimant in the instant case on the assessment of deceased's annual average income of Rs. 3,600/- p.a., which was likely to increase with the time and experience, can safely be taken to be at the rate of Rs. 100/- per month, I.e., Rs. 1200/- per year, since he was the only son of the claimant. The age of the appellant at the time of the death of her only son was about 50 years. The life expectancy of the deceased or of the beneficiaries, whichever is shorter, is taken as an important factor in such cases for the determination of the amount of compensation. In view of the family history of the claimant, the longevity of her life can be presumed. The life expectancy of the deceased or of the beneficiaries, whichever is shorter, is taken as an important factor in such cases for the determination of the amount of compensation. In view of the family history of the claimant, the longevity of her life can be presumed. In the case of 50 years of the claimants' age, it is reasonable to apply the multiplier of 15, but in the present case, the application of multiplier of 20 is found to be just and proper as the claimant has already lived for these years. On applying the multiplier of 20, the amount of dependency comes to Rs. 24,000/-. The Tribunal has not allowed any amount to the claimant for the loss of consortium of her only son in her middle age, and on this account, she would be entitled to Rs. 6,000/-. The total amount would, thus, be Rs. 30,000/- and that we hold to be the compensation amount, payable to the claimant-appellant by the respondents. For the foregoing discussion and on an overall view of the matter, particularly when there is no challenge to the findings of the Tribunal by the respondents, we hold that the claimant deserves the award of Rs. 30,000/-. Now, coming to the next question of rate of interest, to be awarded to the appellant, regard may be had to the observation made by the Apex Court in Jagbir Singh v. Genera/Manager Punjab Roadways [1987 ACJ 15 (SC)], wherein the Supreme Court awarded the interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of application for compensation upto the date of payment of the awarded sum. In view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court, it will be just and fair in the present facts and circumstances of the case, to award interest to the appellant at the normal rate of 12 per cent per annum on the amount of compensation upto the date of its payment. The appeal is, therefore, partly allowed. The amount of compensation is enhanced to a total of Rs. 30,000/- from Rs. 18,000/- together with the interest payable by the respondents at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of application till the date of its payment, credit being given o payments, if any, made in the meanwhile and the impugned award is set aside to that extent. 30,000/- from Rs. 18,000/- together with the interest payable by the respondents at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of application till the date of its payment, credit being given o payments, if any, made in the meanwhile and the impugned award is set aside to that extent. There, shall be no order as to the costs in this appeal. 1987 ACJ 15 (SC) followed.